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

ScyllaDB no longer open source

forum.scylladb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–46 of 46 posts

Re: ScyllaDB no longer open source

#41

Post by relatedtitle »

bayindirh wrote: post #22
krawczstef wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

your comment made me think I read it wrong, but it's not closed source, they're just moving to a source available license...

Source available doesn't allow you to build on that software or patch it the way you see fit. Heck, even some source available licenses doesn't allow you to compile that thing, let alone get parts and use it elsewhere. However, I somewhat like source available licenses currently, because they're neat little mines that sneak in to training sets of generative AI models and make the models less suitable for serious work…

How does it make the models less suitable? Wouldn't more high quality source code help improve it? If it was closed source entirely it couldn't be trained on.

Re: ScyllaDB no longer open source

#42

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

perrohunter wrote: post #39
kstrauser wrote: post #8

It’s always kind of a relief when I can completely remove something from my long list of things to check out. Life’s too short to bother with proprietary platforms. A closed source database? Hah, no.

You don't need to look at the source code of Oracle to know it's the best RDBMS

No database is worth entering intoa legal agreement with the closest thing we've ever had to a real life Bond villain.

Re: ScyllaDB no longer open source

#43

Post by kstrauser »

perrohunter wrote: post #39
kstrauser wrote: post #8

It’s always kind of a relief when I can completely remove something from my long list of things to check out. Life’s too short to bother with proprietary platforms. A closed source database? Hah, no.

You don't need to look at the source code of Oracle to know it's the best RDBMS

Best at what?

It has no reputation as the best at any of my database use cases.

Re: ScyllaDB no longer open source

#44

Post by kstrauser »

Cpoll wrote: post #37
theamk wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Licensor grants You a limited, non-exclusive, revocable, non-sublicensable, non-transferable, For now it's source-available with generous limit, but this can be changed or revoked at any time, and this may immediately make your existing installations illegal.

> this can be changed or revoked at any time, and this may immediately make your existing installations illegal. I was going to argue, but they do explicitly say "revocable." Has such a license revocation ever been upheld in court?

My understanding is it’s the opposite: that license is the only thing granting you usage rights. In the absence of a contract, or words in the license to the contrary, they could revoke those rights on a whim. It’s not so much that you have a default right to use their proprietary software and they may issue something that revokes it. It’s that you have no right to use their software except their continued good will.

The GPL says:

> All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of copyright on the Program, and are irrevocable provided the stated conditions are met.

That’s a huge difference.

Re: ScyllaDB no longer open source

#45

Post by kstrauser »

relatedtitle wrote: post #41
bayindirh wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source available doesn't allow you to build on that software or patch it the way you see fit. Heck, even some source available licenses doesn't allow you to compile that thing, let alone get parts and use it elsewhere. However, I somewhat like source available licenses currently, because they're neat little mines that sneak in to training sets of generative AI models and make the models less suitable for serious work…

How does it make the models less suitable? Wouldn't more high quality source code help improve it? If it was closed source entirely it couldn't be trained on.

If it’s trained on proprietary software and then injects non-Free code into your project, you may have all kinds of unplanned legal exposure. That’s what makes such a model less suitable.

Re: ScyllaDB no longer open source

#46

Post by anonzzzies »

brianwawok wrote: post #34
anonzzzies wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but that's not an option for our lawyers; we need the actual freedom to do whatever. Source available is not a thing for us; it's not about the source (we will probably not ever touch it anyway), it is about the freedom when they go out of business, change the rules , etc. But I am not a lawyer but I do agree: we gladly pay licenses and support but if things go crazy (upping the prices to stupid amounts etc) we…

I do like it. What percent of revenue do you contribute back to OSS? As long as it flows both ways, it’s great.

As said in the comment, we pay for support and hosting for the open products that we use and we sponsor on github. % of rev is a good question; I will find that out. What is a good % you would say?
Post reply on HN