Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Are Changing the License for Akka

lightbend.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 360 posts

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#351

Post by the_af »

hocuspocus wrote: post #142
rockyj wrote: post #117

It all started with Scala which was a decent, functional Java (at the time) and then they formed a commercial organisation called "TypeSafe" around it. Then it took on VC money and then also renamed itself to "Lightbend" (for some reason). In this time, Akka which was one of the special library of Scala was also included in the Lightbend fold with many of the prominent devs. While I understand that open source develo…

The trajectory of Lightbend has been raising doubts for a while, some would argue since the renaming. One important change coming with Scala 3 is precisely that its future doesn't depend on Lightbend's financial success anymore.

> The trajectory of Lightbend has been raising doubts for a while, some would argue since the renaming.

Definitely. I remember some of us Scala early adopters being concerned about the nonsensical name change, and being assured by others that nothing fundamental was being changed, that Lightbend was "a more user friendly name than TypeSafe" (as if the notion of type-safety was a barrier to entry for goddamn Scala, for crying out loud).

Seems we skeptics were proven right.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#352

Post by the_af »

braingenious wrote: post #35

I’ve never quite understood the amount of rancor that changes like this elicit here. It seems like people come out of the woodworks acting like they have been personally affronted by this, or that this is somehow directly affecting their lives. Is everybody here (planning on?) using this software to build companies with more than $25 million in revenue… and they can’t use something else with a more permissible licens…

> I’ve never quite understood the amount of rancor that changes like this elicit here.

It's bait and switch, and nobody likes that. They used a true open source license, earning them developer good will, until it stopped serving their purposes. It also undermines open source as a concept.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#353

Post by the_af »

JGailor wrote: post #176
that_guy_iain wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't use Akka, but I feel the pain of the people who did that and now has to tear the thing out. I highly suspect very few will ahve to tear it out. It'll cost more money to replace than it would to pay license fees for many companies. Developer time costs money. > Because I don't see how anyone would want to use it, that pricing is completely ridiculous. No one should pay per vCPU, much less those extortionate…

> I highly suspect very few will ahve to tear it out. It'll cost more money to replace than it would to pay license fees for many companies. Developer time costs money. That is the strategy companies are using to monetize these sort of projects. Give it away for free and then charge when a company has to make the choice of spending money to get rid of it and to replace it or to just pay for it. The lesson to take awa…

Indeed, and that's predatory behavior and it hurts the open source community because of the mistrust it sows.

Bad news. And people here are asking where's the bait and switch? Amazing.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#354

Post by the_af »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #132
TAForObvReasons wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny to see how HN flipped on this subject. My company was stung by Handsontable switching to a proprietary license https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19488642 and the top comment back in 2019 was "Great to hear".

Your company wasn't stung by it. You chose to get stung by it. Just pin your version and live with it. If it's such a critical piece of your business, either pay a fair price for it, or make it yourself.

So you are basically saying "don't use open source software". Great.

"Pinning your version" forever isn't a viable strategy in lots of cases.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#355

Post by the_af »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #306
josephcsible wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But none of those restrictions are caused by the author's choice of license.

Correct. But I think it's worth keeping in mind that we can't treat free speech as a binary value; we need an easier to reach bar no matter what.

In this case that's a distinction without a difference: Akka is no longer Free.

Not for anyone. In some cases, you might use the source code free of charge. Lowercase "free". But Free for nobody.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#356

Post by the_af »

res0nat0r wrote: post #273
TAForObvReasons wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "moral high ground" is a recognition of the true dynamic in open source. What really happens is: 1) Project is open source 2) People use the project because it is open source 3) People contribute bug reports and fixes, creating value and improving the open source project because it is open source 4) People spread the word about the project, free marketing because it is open source 5) Maintainers decide to relicen…

I think it's simpler than that, just from their relicensing FAQ: https://www.lightbend.com/akka/license-faq > Akka requires significant investment in order to maintain its position as a preeminent distributed systems runtime. Many organizations have adopted Akka and are seeing significant benefits for their organizations. > However, in recent years an increasing number of those organizations have elected to self-supp…

> They need money to continue development, and the current model isn't generating enough revenue for them to stay in business.

But if they had started with a proprietary license, it's likely Akka wouldn't even exist today. So they are now piggybacking on the success brought by using an open source license.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#357

Post by xani_ »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #183
disruptiveink wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is really buried in the discussion. $2000 per vCPU for a library is absolutely insane pricing, unless you're running Akka on a single bare metal server, this is a non-starter for anyone. Really unsure what Lightbend is trying to do here, this seems like the death of Akka.

> unless you're running Akka on a single bare metal server A tiny single bear metal server, at that; most server hardware I use has 48 cores!

Running it at Raspberry Pi would cost you 8k.

There is like nothing where that would be cheap. Even if you looked for something that has very high IPC and clock rate.... the CPU with that will have at least 4 cores if not more.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#358

Post by halfmatthalfcat »

the_af wrote: post #350
rockyj wrote: post #117

It all started with Scala which was a decent, functional Java (at the time) and then they formed a commercial organisation called "TypeSafe" around it. Then it took on VC money and then also renamed itself to "Lightbend" (for some reason). In this time, Akka which was one of the special library of Scala was also included in the Lightbend fold with many of the prominent devs. While I understand that open source develo…

> they formed a commercial organisation called "TypeSafe" around it. Then it took on VC money and then also renamed itself to "Lightbend" My alarm bells were ringing as far back as that name change. Everyone I knew who used Scala thought the name change was silly and foreboding of bad things. "TypeSafe" has a nice, technical ring to it, and it embodied what we thought Scala was all about. Now, "Lightbend". Talk about…

It's such an absolutely terrible name too. Could nobody at Typesafe come up with something less generic and soulless? Really astonishing how you can fuck it up so badly.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#359

Post by ohgodplsno »

the_af wrote: post #354
ohgodplsno wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your company wasn't stung by it. You chose to get stung by it. Just pin your version and live with it. If it's such a critical piece of your business, either pay a fair price for it, or make it yourself.

So you are basically saying "don't use open source software". Great. "Pinning your version" forever isn't a viable strategy in lots of cases.

No, I'm saying to not be a leech.

Re: We Are Changing the License for Akka

#360

Post by the_af »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #359
the_af wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are basically saying "don't use open source software". Great. "Pinning your version" forever isn't a viable strategy in lots of cases.

No, I'm saying to not be a leech.

I apologize, my reply was uncharitable. You are right that private companies should stop being leeches and give back to the community.

I just wish we all collectively made FOSS work, because to my mind it's the greatest development in computing history, instead of going the proprietary road once again. Which I think is bad for all of us, even if short term it might look like a solution.

But yes, leeching is a problem.

Post reply on HN