Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | hirose31's comments login

The license does not deny others the right to build on the software. The license is a fork of the AGPL and adds a clause that requires you to open source not only software, but supporting software that is used to run the service. One could argue that this license would result in more publicly available software, not less.

Here is the clause for reference:

> If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge, under the terms of this License. Making the functionality of the Program or modified version available to third parties as a service includes, without limitation, enabling third parties to interact with the functionality of the Program or modified version remotely through a computer network, offering a service the value of which entirely or primarily derives from the value of the Program or modified version, or offering a service that accomplishes for users the primary purpose of the Software or modified version.


Right. But the point here wasn't that Amazon is doing something wrong in respect to the license. They release their modifications to Elastic, and they could theoretically release whatever "functionality" is required to "interact with the functionality of the Program".

What was being argued was that it was ethically wrong of Amazon to engage in this business without some sort of blessing from (and, one would imagine, revenue sharing with) the original developers. Under that argument, their misdoing isn't releasing too little, but doing the work in the first place.

Something like the AGPL can absolutely be a tool for more FOSS in the world. But I think there was two things being argued here.


I really have to tip my hat to GitLab marketing the past few months as they've done a phenomenal job. I do wonder what will happen to their pricing once they raise additional rounds of financing? What happens to their pricing once their investors want to see a return on investment? I like the carpe diem business strategy, and of course I like free, but I'm a bit skeptical at the long term viability of a business and market that seems to be racing to the bottom.


Thanks for asking, I tried to explain this better on our website after reading your questions: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/commit/836c494f...


> what will happen to their pricing

If they start paying users to switch from GitHub I would consider it briefly.


We use Elastic Beanstalk to host our Java applications. We would also be interested in a build solution that supported our deployments. Would that be possible?


You should write a post about your experience with DynamoDB. We considered using it, so i'd love to hear more about your experience


Yeah, I've considered that before. Thanks for the suggestion. If you want me to ping you when I get around to writing it, drop me an email (address is in my profile).


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: