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

CockroachDB license change

cockroachlabs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 476 posts

Re: CockroachDB license change

#431

Post by hnarn »

m463 wrote: post #417
hnarn wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly not ambiguous, but the reason why companies like CockroachDB and others would like to make it appear so certainly is obvious. Anyone confused can just be referred to "The Open Source Definition"[1] by the OSI. [1]: https://opensource.org/osd

that is one definition. It's like saying "freedom". reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_Source_Definition "the definition is the most common standard for open-source software." It is not exclusive. saying "open source" does not describe a license. It is a generic term. And the point is that unless someone points to a standard or a license, they can call their software open source, just show you the s…

It’s not like “freedom” because open source software was a term invented only a few decades ago. Definitions that stray from this definition do so for a very obvious reason in every case I’ve ever seen, and that reason is profit.

You can’t just take a well established term and say “well actually I don’t agree” and don’t expect to annoy people. If you don’t agree with the ideas of FLOSS then use something else and call it something else.

As for your last part, the top answer of this SE question answers it nicely: https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/8367/is-the-t...

Re: CockroachDB license change

#432

Post by api »

d_watt wrote: post #40
api wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone creating free software and changing the license on software they created isn't a "rug pull" in any sense of the word. You paid $0 and contributed nothing. What rug is being pulled? A rug pull is when you buy into something and then it's taken away, like when a cryptocurrency token is busted out or you spend money on something and then it's cancelled or nerfed. Don't like it? Write your own distributed fault t…

I see the issue with these more as if you are paying for it, one of the decision factors to buy it might have been that you have the opportunity to go to an open source version if the relationship gets bad. Sole source vendors are really risky, so open source gives a little control back to the buyer that the vendor won't lock them in then screw them later (oracle). So now if you're paying for Cockroach, you're effect…

It’s Postgres compatible. If you only use standard features your negotiating lever is to bail for another Postgres compatible database. There are tons of managed offerings that are quick to stand up.

This is why standard APIs, protocols, and languages are a more important thing than specific pieces of software. If there is compatibility you have choice.

Re: CockroachDB license change

#433

Post by api »

warvariuc wrote: post #31
api wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone creating free software and changing the license on software they created isn't a "rug pull" in any sense of the word. You paid $0 and contributed nothing. What rug is being pulled? A rug pull is when you buy into something and then it's taken away, like when a cryptocurrency token is busted out or you spend money on something and then it's cancelled or nerfed. Don't like it? Write your own distributed fault t…

> You paid $0 and contributed nothing I think investing into integrating a tool into your infrastructure is not exactly "paying $0".

If you make software and I start using it, I’ve created an obligation for you to keep making it?

Re: CockroachDB license change

#434

Post by timcobb »

mcpherrinm wrote: post #300
timcobb wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is more popular than the Apache Foundation? I thought Apache was top... Is there a cooler/better Apache? If so, please let me know. And when was Apache more popular? I thought it was the uncool place where stuff was written in Java, that became popular because people's conception of Java (and the language/ecosystem itself) changed.

I think CNCF is home to most of the big projects I’ve been contributing to or using lately.

Ah yes, thank you! But would you say they more about infra/platform while Apache is more about application?

Re: CockroachDB license change

#435

Post by collinmanderson »

kragen wrote: post #421
collinmanderson wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 02019 Why not 002019? 6 digits. That would be valid a lot longer.

i wholeheartedly support your choice to henceforth format your years with six digits

I'm waiting for python support first. Not sure what the eta is or why it's taking so long. Every day we get closer to the eventual deadline.

> Extended date representations are not currently supported (±YYYYYY-MM-DD).

https://docs.python.org/3/library/datetime.html#datetime.dat...

> MAXYEAR is 9999.

https://docs.python.org/3/library/datetime.html#datetime.MAX...

I'm also waiting for longnow.org to start using long dates behind the scenes, like image urls, html metadata, http headers, etc. They need to eat their own dog food as far as software goes.

Re: CockroachDB license change

#436

Post by zeeZ »

The FAQ that asks "What telemetry data will be collected, and how will it be used?" never answers the first half of the question in its marketese blurb. You failed the "ask yourself a question and answer it" part of the exam.

Re: CockroachDB license change

#437

Post by pjmlp »

ElijahLynn wrote: post #209
nsm wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep! I actually far prefer closed source software, made by non-VC funded companies, where there business is to create good software that actually adds value for the license I'm paying for. Something like Sublime Text or JetBrains. Sure can have people spend years of their life working on something, but release it as open source because VCs are paying for it, and that leads to more mindshare, but it leaves a bad taste…

I'm imagining that those closed source softwares wouldn't be possible without open source libraries and tools...

They were possible for quite some time, I guess people born after Linus created Linux have no idea how we used to pay for everything, or pirate.

Re: CockroachDB license change

#438

Post by pjmlp »

Conan_Kudo wrote: post #428
swiftcoder wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the sense that most modern programming languages and compilers are open-source, sure, nothing outside the embedded world can truly be built without relying on open source. There are still native shops that rely on very little open source, though at this point probably only in niches like gamedev or defence.

This is not true even in those spaces anymore. Games these days require libraries like SDL, or (increasingly) use engines like Godot. Defense is a weird place, but open source is used quite a lot there, it's often required to do so and to record the open source consumed to produce a product. And often times, it must be commercial open source where you can get engineering support for the lifetime of the product's exis…

Not at all, when talking about game consoles.

Re: CockroachDB license change

#439

Post by moderation »

bcantrill wrote: post #380
redwood wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look forward to reading it

As promised, I have made RFD 508 ("Whither CockroachDB?")[0] public -- along with RFD 53[1] and RFD 110[2], which explain the problem we are trying to solve and our rationale for CockroachDB, respectively. [0] https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0508 [1] https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0053 [2] https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0110

Not Jepsen tested but rqlite [0] could be in the running and meet the requirements and is open source (MIT).

0. https://rqlite.io/

Re: CockroachDB license change

#440

Post by mschae23 »

eikenberry wrote: post #279
haolez wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old(?) school open source with GPL licenses doesn't seem to suffer from this, on a first glance. Maybe Stallman was right. Would love to hear from someone more knowledgeable on this. I'm not trying to troll.

FSF requires signing of a CLA. A CLA would let them change the license to whatever they want, just like these companies. Some people were not happy with GPL3 yet that didn't stop the FSF from changing the licenses on their software.

They explain that without it, they can't effectively enforce the copyrights on their projects: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html.en

I highly doubt that the FSF, who developed the GPL licenses and values free software above anything else, would change the licensing of their projects like "these companies" do.

Post reply on HN