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

Meteor is now MIT licensed

meteor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 127 posts

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#61

Post by pygy_ »

jasonkester wrote: post #57
coderdude wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm open to a compelling argument for why the GPL is better than a license that basically says "you can do whatever you want with this." (From the perspective of deterring the locking down of computers by corporations.)

Please not here though. By all means fire up a new thread and I'm sure you guys will wrap this up in no time. But for the sake of the rest of us here to discuss the topic we're discussing, please don't drop a little religious war into the middle of it.

It could hardly be more on topic, and until your dismissive post, the discussion was civil.

You're the one who conflates licenses and religion, and who refuse to even discuss the topic.

The choice of software licenses is far more nuanced than religion. There's a lot of misinformation around the GPL, and it doesn't hurt to talk about it.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#62

Post by pbreit »

guelo wrote: post #50
coderdude wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm open to a compelling argument for why the GPL is better than a license that basically says "you can do whatever you want with this." (From the perspective of deterring the locking down of computers by corporations.)

If it isn't obvious, GPL is an attack against proprietary computers and against the corporations that have been trying repeatedly over decades to bottle-up and monopolize the computer revolution.

GPL is an attack on the user who wants to do whatever (s)he wants.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#63

Post by pbreit »

wavephorm wrote: post #13

I think they should've tried to commercialize it. There is a real lack of good, new development systems these days. If you completely open source a new system, developers will just rip it off, contribute nothing, and it will go nowhere. So where's the incentive to continue making it better? Developers need to wake up, and realize that new, and substantially better systems can be built if they are willing to pay for t…

The is _nothing_ stopping them from commercializing it.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#64

Post by foolinator »

heretohelp wrote: post #54
analog wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From their newsletter which just went out, can't find a link online. "Please make sure it's reasonably secure. Meteor security isn't as hard as people think. Admittedly it doesn't yet have the delicious "candy coating" that the database and DOM update stuff has, but we didn't, like, forget to put any in. Here's what Made With does: * Use Meteor.publish() and Meteor.subscribe() to control what clients can see (remove…

>* Use Meteor.publish() and Meteor.subscribe() to control what clients can see (remove the 'autopublish' package first). Actually you may not need to do this for a blog. Scoping isn't enough. >* Use Meteor.methods() and Meteor.call() to define secure server functions and call them from the client. Then lock down your app by disabling the "training wheel" methods that let any client do any write." So, I can't make a p…

You're absolutely right. But all frameworks have to go through these humps. Hell, I remember just 2 years ago having MongoDB in production it would regularly crash. We got rid of it in production, but I'd reconsider using it now.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#65

Post by foolinator »

mwill wrote: post #9

Maybe I'm just not the audience for Meteor, because while it looks like a great project but as a nodejs guy, the fact that it hides itself away from the platform and turned away from the fantastic npm makes me sort of weary about it as a whole. But I imagine people coming from rails or whatever don't find this a problem at all.

I don't mind it if it hides away from a platform.

After all, that's the point of an API - to hide the dirty details.

I mean, I've not touched assembly code in over 10 years. I've not touched C++ in 10. This is a good thing, but I do remember saying the same thing about Java about hiding memory details. Now none of these languages require heavy memory management and hide nearly all those dirty details.

It doesn't seem like meteor is ready for prime time, but it is impressive (like RoR or roo) how you can make a site in less than 10 minutes.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#66

Post by htilford »

meta8609 wrote: post #53

Why is this framework better than things like ember.js, especially if ember has something like this https://github.com/tchak/colors-demo

I don't think 'better' is the right question. Their's room for multiple frameworks. To answer the question I think Meteor's strong suit is live coding for rapid prototyping.

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#67

Post by skeptical »

guelo wrote: post #46

I feel it is sad that so few HN hackers seem to appreciate the vision of the GPL. GPL needs more indispensable software like this for it to thrive and protect us all from a future of completely locked down computers.

I for one like GPL's philosophy but to be honest I mostly use MIT on my small projects because I don't care. If credit gets attributed rightfully that's really all I care about.

I don't care if the MIT is better from an economical prespective or whatever. I'm not too worried if a company can't just use my software because it's GPLed. Their effen problem, I believe. For me, the MIT license is just small and to the point. Why isn't that a valid reason?

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#68

Post by hbbio »

dmix wrote: post #49
heretohelp wrote: post #45

More importantly, how do I keep clients from fucking up my database? How is security being done? Seriously, if I'm not capable of baking limitations into data persistence/logic at the server level then this entire framework is worthless except for building up a portfolio of cute demos that can't be used for any real work.

As this question comes up every single time Meteor or Firebase is brought up, I think its fair to say that "we're working on it" wasn't and isn't a good enough answer.

You should also have a quick look there: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3858838

Re: Meteor is now MIT licensed

#70

Post by geon »

guelo wrote: post #46

I feel it is sad that so few HN hackers seem to appreciate the vision of the GPL. GPL needs more indispensable software like this for it to thrive and protect us all from a future of completely locked down computers.

From a user perspective, GPL offers in theory more freedom, since new products built on codebase X will also be free.

It is debatable if this is true in practice. If less software gets built as a result of the license restriction, the GPL takes away freedom. Even closed source software adds some freedom - the freedom of choice.

From a developer perspective, there is no question which one is more free. We often do not have the choice to release our software as open source, and when we do, an invasive license like the GPL is still a headache. If I can pick up a library or framework and just use it, that's the one I will pick.

Post reply on HN