3 ms·

[videolan infra guy here] The whole idea of VideoLAN infrastructure migration from gitweb/trac/etc to gitlab and not to github was to use and promote free and

by thresh 11y ago

[videolan infra guy here] The whole idea of VideoLAN infrastructure migration from gitweb/trac/etc to gitlab and not to github was to use and promote free and open-source software. Using closed-source software there is out of question, really.

Afforess 11y ago
Gitlab EE is actually open source. https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee
- DouweM 11y ago
  The GitLab EE source is publicly viewable, but its license is not open source. See https://about.gitlab.com/2015/05/22/gitlab-7-11-released/ https://about.gitlab.com/2015/05/22/gitlab-7-11-released/.
  - masida 11y ago
    This is really a problem I think. Maybe GitLab could reconsider to adopt a licensing model[1] for the Enterprise Edition that would make it more Free Software friendly? [1] I.e. a licensing model based on GPL and selling services that Red Hat uses for RHEL, instead of a licensing model like they, and a minority of the "open source" companies, use.
    - sytse 11y ago
      When we introduced the Enterprise Edition we had it under MIT license. This caused much confusion with our customers. Maybe the situation is better now with companies like Hortonworks educating the market. But unlike others we want to make our open source edition as simple to install and maintain as the paid version. Anyway, maybe you could be a bit more specific about the problem you see with our model, I would love to get specific. Also see https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship BTW I presume RedHat choose a GPL license for RHEL because they didn't have a choice due to the GPL license on Linux.
      - scrupulusalbion 11y ago
        My understanding from taking a Red Hat sysadmin course is that what you get from a RHEL subscription is firstly access to their repos from which to download updates and additional packages. The other, perhaps bigger, portion of a RHEL subscription is the support; I think they will answer the phone and provide you fixes for any bugs in RHEL-provided software relatively quickly. This is nice for companies, for whom uptime and stability are often superior to most other concerns, like staying close in feature parity to upstream.
        sytse 11y ago
        We want to give people using GitLab CE an awesome upgrade experience too https://twitter.com/J_Salamin/status/687884326629937152 https://twitter.com/J_Salamin/status/687884326629937152 so limiting our packages server to just EE is not an option. We tried charging only for support but now that we have the Omnibus packages it is rare for users to need support (and we like it that way).
- drostie 11y ago
  If you need help on the difference between "publicly viewable" and "open source" see this answer to a related question on the Open Source Stack Exchange: http://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/2338/can-i-use-gpl-libraries-in-a-closed-source-project-if-only-the-output-is-distrib/2343#2343 http://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/2338/can-i-use...
  - gpvos 11y ago
    Note that the accepted answer there is wrong, as it ignores the fact that the question asker wanted to distribute virtual machines containing the software, which is a violation of the GPL. The currently second answer by h22 is correct.
- dsp1234 11y ago
  In addition to the other commenters, the actual license can be found at https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/blob/master/LICENSE https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/blob/master/LICENSE "This software and associated documentation files (the "Software") may only be used if you (and any entity that you represent) have agreed to, and are in compliance with, the GitLab Subscription Terms of Service, available at https://about.gitlab.com/terms/#subscription https://about.gitlab.com/terms/#subscription (the “EE Terms”), and otherwise have a valid GitLab Enterprise Edition subscription for the correct number of user seats."

by thresh 11y ago

Afforess 11y ago

Gitlab EE is actually open source. https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee

DouweM 11y ago
The GitLab EE source is publicly viewable, but its license is not open source. See https://about.gitlab.com/2015/05/22/gitlab-7-11-released/ https://about.gitlab.com/2015/05/22/gitlab-7-11-released/.
- masida 11y ago
  This is really a problem I think. Maybe GitLab could reconsider to adopt a licensing model[1] for the Enterprise Edition that would make it more Free Software friendly? [1] I.e. a licensing model based on GPL and selling services that Red Hat uses for RHEL, instead of a licensing model like they, and a minority of the "open source" companies, use.
  - sytse 11y ago
    When we introduced the Enterprise Edition we had it under MIT license. This caused much confusion with our customers. Maybe the situation is better now with companies like Hortonworks educating the market. But unlike others we want to make our open source edition as simple to install and maintain as the paid version. Anyway, maybe you could be a bit more specific about the problem you see with our model, I would love to get specific. Also see https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship BTW I presume RedHat choose a GPL license for RHEL because they didn't have a choice due to the GPL license on Linux.
    - scrupulusalbion 11y ago
      My understanding from taking a Red Hat sysadmin course is that what you get from a RHEL subscription is firstly access to their repos from which to download updates and additional packages. The other, perhaps bigger, portion of a RHEL subscription is the support; I think they will answer the phone and provide you fixes for any bugs in RHEL-provided software relatively quickly. This is nice for companies, for whom uptime and stability are often superior to most other concerns, like staying close in feature parity to upstream.
      - sytse 11y ago
        We want to give people using GitLab CE an awesome upgrade experience too https://twitter.com/J_Salamin/status/687884326629937152 https://twitter.com/J_Salamin/status/687884326629937152 so limiting our packages server to just EE is not an option. We tried charging only for support but now that we have the Omnibus packages it is rare for users to need support (and we like it that way).
drostie 11y ago
If you need help on the difference between "publicly viewable" and "open source" see this answer to a related question on the Open Source Stack Exchange: http://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/2338/can-i-use-gpl-libraries-in-a-closed-source-project-if-only-the-output-is-distrib/2343#2343 http://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/2338/can-i-use...
- gpvos 11y ago
  Note that the accepted answer there is wrong, as it ignores the fact that the question asker wanted to distribute virtual machines containing the software, which is a violation of the GPL. The currently second answer by h22 is correct.
dsp1234 11y ago
In addition to the other commenters, the actual license can be found at https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/blob/master/LICENSE https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/blob/master/LICENSE "This software and associated documentation files (the "Software") may only be used if you (and any entity that you represent) have agreed to, and are in compliance with, the GitLab Subscription Terms of Service, available at https://about.gitlab.com/terms/#subscription https://about.gitlab.com/terms/#subscription (the “EE Terms”), and otherwise have a valid GitLab Enterprise Edition subscription for the correct number of user seats."