Micro 3.0 is a platform for cloud native development • Hacker News Board

Re: Micro 3.0 is a platform for cloud native development

#61

Post by wanderer2323 » Wed, Nov 11, 2020, 10:49 PM UTC

asim wrote: post #31

oersted wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see now that "go, java, typescript, ruby, python clients" is done in the roadmap, but can't find any documentation about it.

We have multi-language grpc clients code generated in https://github.com/micro/micro/tree/master/client/sdk but we need to publish to various package managers or at the very least wrap them in a more clean and simple experience first. It's hard to replicate our Go framework experience in clients so I think to start its around consumption. I think grpc-web based typescript client or OpenAPI generated clients might be…

Have you tried gapic-generators? They aim to create a full client library from the protos (used to create google’s cloud libraries). E.g. https://github.com/googleapis/gapic-generator-ruby

Re: Micro 3.0 is a platform for cloud native development

#62

Post by zyxan » Thu, Nov 12, 2020, 10:23 AM UTC

emptysongglass wrote: post #34

choeger wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa, I really hope no one ever comes telling you such an offensive thing. If owncloud has customers and/or investors they can develop whatever they want and I will applaude them for sharing the code.

It wouldn't be an issue for me if these legacy products either a. opted for more ethics where their fork showed them the way or b. if they actually produced innovation instead of desperately holding onto big company departments. OpenOffice, for example, has basically done nothing but maintenance. It's not something to be proud of.

> OpenOffice, for example, has basically done nothing but maintenance. It's not something to be proud of.

That's a dangerous fallacy. Only innovation and no maintenance is not the way economies grow. Go ahead and take a deep breath -> https://aeon.co/essays/innovation-is-overvalued-maintenance-...

> [...] opted for more ethics where their fork showed them the way [...]

Forking isn't necessarily a bad thing. From a free market perspective it incentives competition, and per my respect, the original company owes nothing to a forked business out of the original codebase. In this particular example both projects took different directions, why would the fork have to take a higher moral grounds in respect to the original?

Re: Micro 3.0 is a platform for cloud native development

#63

Post by karmakaze » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

asim wrote: post #50

karmakaze wrote: post #49

Can someone explain the implications of this point of the Polyform license? (It seems perhaps AGPL-like but 'product' could be very broad) Noncompete Any purpose is a permitted purpose, except for providing any product that competes with the software or any product the licensor or any of its affiliates provides using the software.

The only restriction here is selling Micro as a Service e.g AWS can't pick up and sell Micro. This is a common problem in the open source industry and Polyform is trying to create licensing standardisation rather than everyone hand crafting something. For larger orgs in the long term being able to approve a common license rather than 100 bespoke ones.

That may indeed be the intention. IANAL but I wouldn't trust the broadly worded "providing any product that competes with the software or any product the licensor or any of its affiliates provides using the software" to mean that and only that.

Here's a list of the PolyForm licences[0] with the 'PolyForm Shield' one being used. I would have expected the 'PolyForm Perimeter' to be more of the open-source type license, based just on those summaries than one that protects the 'provider' from competition.

[0] https://polyformproject.org/licenses/