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

Elasticsearch is open source, again

elastic.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 473 posts

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#81

Post by chadash »

reducesuffering wrote: post #14

If Amazon's OpenSearch plateaus, and everyone wants to host ElasticSearch, but on their existing AWS infra/sales business inertia, this issue will fundamentally reoccur. Nothing actually changed except Elastic thinks Amazon will commit to their own fork. If Amazon doesn't, we're back to square one: Amazon hosts open source ElasticSearch, Elastic changes their license, another fork. "Amazon is fully invested in their…

I love https://resend.com/ as an example of a website that does a GREAT job explaining what they do. Lots of companies tell you that integrating their product is quick, but with their website I can look at it for 30 seconds and understand what the next steps would be.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#83

Post by flockonus »

NewJazz wrote: post #62
aabhay wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are songs by Kendrick Lamar. I guess that these were used to try and add a youthful, lighthearted touch to the article? Didn't work on me though.

I'm a fan of that album and I didn't even realize the reference. Is there any other point to it?

Subliminally heart warming. Just look how the article ends:

> Forever :elasticheart: Open Source

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#84

Post by rectang »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #32
vineyardmike wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I sell my Toyota car on the side of the road I can call it a Toyota. If I sell you ElasticSearch(tm) Service which is the actual ES code base, what’s the infringement?

> If I sell you ElasticSearch(tm) Service which is the actual ES code base, what’s the infringement? A reasonable consumer or customer might be confused into thinking a service named ElasticSearch(tm) Service is being provided by the company behind ElasticSearch. This confusion is exactly what trademarks rather than copyrights are meant to prevent. The trademark law doctrine of nominative fair use allows you to descr…

That's an excellent explanation of a situation with a lot of complexity. Well done!

The confusion between ElasticSearch the software kit and ElasticSearch the hosted service illustrates some of the drawbacks of having the same name for your Open Source product and your business.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#85

Post by sofixa »

chadash wrote: post #69

I'm pretty happy with this, since they are keeping the option to use the Elastic License. Now everyone can be happy. To me, it's weird that the AGPL is any more "open source" than the Elastic License. The AGPL requires you to publish all of your source code if you make any changes to the product; the Elastic License just says, "don't use our code to make a direct competitor to Elasticsearch". I find the former to be…

Same applies to BSL and similar. Not being able to compete with the project owners is much less restrictive, for me, than AGPL/GPL.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#86

Post by xeraa »

orra wrote: post #8
foxyv wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was so that AWS would create their own name for their fork: > we changed the license, knowing it would result in a fork of Elasticsearch with a different name and a different trajectory. It’s a long story. I think the name of the fork is now OpenSearch.

I don't understand why they didn't treat Amazon's previous offering as a trademark infringement.

We did: https://www.elastic.co/blog/elastic-and-amazon-reach-agreeme...

But it takes a long time. And it's very costly (especially against a much larger entity like Amazon). Legal battles alone will rarely save you (in time).

[I work for Elastic]

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#87

Post by ezekg »

chadash wrote: post #69

I'm pretty happy with this, since they are keeping the option to use the Elastic License. Now everyone can be happy. To me, it's weird that the AGPL is any more "open source" than the Elastic License. The AGPL requires you to publish all of your source code if you make any changes to the product; the Elastic License just says, "don't use our code to make a direct competitor to Elasticsearch". I find the former to be…

> If a vendor goes under, I can self-host.

It's worth mentioning that this is true -- to an extent. Under ELv2, if the vendor goes under, you can self-host, but you will eventually lose access to any features protected by a license key if/when that license expires, since said vendor can no longer renew said license.

This was one of the main drivers for me writing the FCL [0], which undergoes DOSP [1], even for the protected features.

[0]: https://fcl.dev

[1]: https://opensource.org/dosp

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#89

Post by js4ever »

lolinder wrote: post #75
js4ever wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I deployed elastic was years ago. In the meantime I deployed hundreds of opensearch instead for customers.

Are you the one who makes the call, or are you getting hundreds of customers requesting OpenSearch over Elastic? If you're making the call then that's really one anecdote, not hundreds.

I let the customers choose by themselves. And guess what they choose every single time after checking license cost from Elastic.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#90

Post by trog »

mrcwinn wrote: post #76
candiddevmike wrote: post #35

Stock is down almost 25% afterhours (not sure if due to this or their earnings call)

"'We had a slower start to the year with the volume of customer commitments impacted by segmentation changes that we made at the beginning of the year, which are taking longer than expected to settle. We have been taking steps to address this, but it will impact our revenue this year,' said Ash Kulkarni, Chief Executive Officer, Elastic." So, whatever that means, is the answer to your question.

I guess it's better to have nerds fighting about licensing filling up the Internet instead of people talking about why there's a 25% decline in the share price :)
Post reply on HN