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

The OpenTF Manifesto

opentf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 392 posts

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#361

Post by yellowapple »

denvrede wrote: post #338
brikis98 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truth is that a fork hurts everyone. Imagine a future CTO trying to pick the IaC tools for their company. They see Terraform as an option, but then learn there are multiple forks, licensing questions, and a big battle happening in the community. What do they do? They are now way more likely to pick a different tool that is genuinely open source. The same is true of every dev considering where to build their caree…

The guys at Pulumi must be having a field day right now. It's exactly how you describe it for us. We're long overdue with an upgrade of our Terraform config from pre v1.0. We have to most likely re-write a big part of our HCL code, so why not try a competitor? With Vault however that's another story, I've yet to find another secrets management system that has a tight integration with Kubernetes, AWS and supports prov…

Someone else posted a list of Vault alternatives, multiple of which (AFAICT) check your boxes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37151218

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#362

Post by yellowapple »

bayindirh wrote: post #136
bloopernova wrote: post #125

If any Hashicorp people are reading, can you please tell your middle and senior management that this decision has deeply soured my entire DevOps cohort on continuing to use Terraform in the future. We're already exploring alternatives. Future client projects may not use Terraform at all. Languages and frameworks must remain open or they will wither and die.

As a Free Software advocate and supporter, I'm thinking about the answer to this question: - MPL is a weak-copyleft license, which allows companies to grab and run Terraform codebase, provide it as-is (as Terraform), or as white-labeled Terraform compatible feature/layer. This is alright (because license allows this). - These people also contribute their own fixes upstream, which is great, and maintain their own patc…

It ain't like Terraform itself was ever a huge moneymaker. Terraform Cloud (i.e. the fancy-shmancy Terraform backend), maybe, but the actual language, the providers, the modules, etc. are all pretty universally free-as-in-beer. The only way to make money with them is to use them to build something else that then makes money.

Put simply:

> we can't generate enough revenue from it to keep the company afloat and continue providing TerraForm development, and sell it as a product at the same time.

They were never selling it as a product in the first place. It's more of a loss leader if anything; Costco has its $1.50 hot dogs to attract customers to buy memberships, and HashiCorp has Terraform (and its provider/module ecosystems) to attract customers to buy Terraform Cloud (and Vault, and Nomad, and everything else they actually do sell).

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#363

Post by yellowapple »

kmeisthax wrote: post #93
cies wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought Linus and other believed GPLv2 was fine and the improvements of GPLv3 did not outweigh the potential problems introduced by it. It never came to a point where all authors were asked to agree, or sign away their ownership.

Torvalds considered the anti-TiVo clause to be changing the deal and he didn't want to do that, and there's no way in GPLv3 to opt-out of the clause[0]. This is less "locking down devices is a human right" and more him being angry that the FSF was trying to butt into his project's affairs. He's also similarly angry about "GNU/Linux" as it sounds an awful lot like Stallman just demanding everyone stick "GNU" onto the…

> and there's no way in GPLv3 to opt-out of the clause

And even if you could, you're basically just left with the GPLv2.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#364

Post by yellowapple »

rwmj wrote: post #105
cies wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought Linus and other believed GPLv2 was fine and the improvements of GPLv3 did not outweigh the potential problems introduced by it. It never came to a point where all authors were asked to agree, or sign away their ownership.

We changed the license[1] of a project which had 10 contributors, and we got every single one of them to do an Acked-by (by email) which took some weeks. That was on the advice of our lawyers. Can't imagine the impossible hassle of doing the same for something like Linux. [1] https://gitlab.com/nbdkit/nbdkit/-/commit/952ffe0fc7685ea775...

And that's assuming that all the contributors are even alive in the first place; unless you've got a Ouija board handy, you're gonna have one hell of a time changing Linux's license.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#365

Post by yellowapple »

LVB wrote: post #13
jsiepkes wrote: post #4

Part of me hopes a fork comes out of this. I mean maybe features like this PR[1] for local state file encryption can then finally get merged. [1] https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform/pull/28603

I did see https://github.com/diggerhq/open-terraform but have no idea if it is related. And I’m sure there are others. What I’ll be interested to see with the forks is how they will practically be maintained. All the bug and security fixes that HashiCorp is writing can’t just be cherry-picked into these forks (I think?), so what exactly are they supposed to do? Update: and in the past hour this repo is gone.

> Update: and in the past hour this repo is gone.

Which is interesting, since Digger (the company that created that fork) is one of the OpenTF Manifesto signatories. Maybe they're recreating it under a different name / without the Hashicorp/Terraform branding all over the place?

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#367

Post by yellowapple »

ddon wrote: post #109
igorzij wrote: post #11

Digger here Our statement: https://medium.com/@DiggerHQ/diggers-statement-on-the-hashic...

Impossible to read, behind a paywall... why people post stuff to Medium is a big mystery to me :) Here is how your post looks like: https://postimg.cc/Pvwdw8D3

You can click the X on that modal to close it.

(But yes, I agree that this is annoying, and this kind of sign-up-nagging is what prevents me from having any interest in using Medium or Substack.)

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#368

Post by yellowapple »

LinXitoW wrote: post #272
mousetree wrote: post #128

As a regular end-user of Terraform, what difference does BSL vs MPL make to me? From reading this article it seems not very much? Perhaps I'm misreading this.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if I use TF in a Petstore-as-a-Service to provision new machines for my users, does that not count as embedding TF? So if HashiCorp decides to do Petstore-as-a-Service tomorrow, no matter how shitty the offering, no matter how insincere, even if it's just a single intern working on it, I would have to, overnight, rip TF out of my entire offering, no?

Correct. That, or "negotiate" with HashiCorp for a commercial license.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#369

Post by cyberax »

aequitas wrote: post #333
cyberax wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulumi looks great. Why aren't they more popular?!? They still need the state (boo!), but otherwise they're great.

You can’t implement this kind of tooling with the features is provides without the state.

You can, for most of the cases. You just need a way to tag resources as belonging to the tool. This can be done via prefixed (or suffixed) names, tags, etc.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#370

Post by denvrede »

yellowapple wrote: post #361
denvrede wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guys at Pulumi must be having a field day right now. It's exactly how you describe it for us. We're long overdue with an upgrade of our Terraform config from pre v1.0. We have to most likely re-write a big part of our HCL code, so why not try a competitor? With Vault however that's another story, I've yet to find another secrets management system that has a tight integration with Kubernetes, AWS and supports prov…

Someone else posted a list of Vault alternatives, multiple of which (AFAICT) check your boxes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37151218

Most of them do the first two: integration with Kubernetes and AWS. Unfortunately short lived DB creds is not in any of those listed.
Post reply on HN