7 ms·

Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client

56 points by eliangcs 10y ago

coldcode 10y ago
Open source on github with a paid subscription. Is this something new?
- orph4nus 10y ago
  Open Source Software (OSS) is not the same as Free Software (FS). And even with Free Software, the free doesn't mean necessarily Gratis. There is something called Free Open Source Software (FOSS), but even there the Free doesn't need to mean Gratis. Either way, I don't think there is something wrong with having a paid service, while still having your code being OSS. It means that you can access the code, and use the product for free, but you might want to pay for the services the company might offer on top of it. Not that I know if that's the case here, but you know, it's possible.
- williamdclt 10y ago
  Gratis != open-source != free (free is about liberty, not price) Any combination of these 3 principles is possible with the right license
  - udkl 10y ago
    Instead of always commenting to resolve the ambiguity around the 'Free' in FOSS I feel we should instead use a different term. Say 'Modifiable'/'Liberal' Open Source Software ?
    - samb1729 10y ago
      'Libre' may be the term you're looking for
      - amelius 10y ago
        Is that even an English word?
        udkl 10y ago
        "Libre /ˈliːbrə/ is a loan word in English[citation needed], borrowed from French and Spanish, used to describe something as being "free", in the sense of "having freedom" or "liberty". It is used in English to distinguish the two meanings of free: free as in freedom (libre) from free as in free of charge (gratis). Another sample is common: Free as "Free Speech", not as "Free Drink"!" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_(word) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_(word) But then the acronym will be 'LOSS' ..... enterprise managers would think twice before considering it ;).
- eliangcs 10y ago
  It's not new. One example I look up to is Sidekiq (http://sidekiq.org http://sidekiq.org). It offers a paid subscription for its pro version.
  - AtheistOfFail 10y ago
    Right, but sidekiq's pro version isn't in a github repo. They host a private repo for you when you fork over the cash and discontinue it after a year.
    - eliangcs 10y ago
      HTTP Prompt paid version isn't on GitHub either. It's hosted on a private server only available for paid users.
droog 10y ago
From http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html: > Fork is a term invented by GitHub. No, it is not. Also, do I get royalties for my contributions to this open source project? Since you're literally selling other people a gated license to the code I contribute, I'm wondering how this works from a legal perspective.
- JustSomeNobody 10y ago
  > Fork is a term invented by GitHub. Amazing, isn't it? With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it.
  - tradersam 10y ago
    > With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it. And yet, you still can't believe everything you read on the Internet.
    - JustSomeNobody 10y ago
      You can at least fact check who invented the term fork.
- detaro 10y ago
  Doing that without a Contributors License Agreement seems at the very least iffy. (AGPL + commercial isn't exactly unusual, but normally there is a CLA involved)
  - matt4077 10y ago
    The (A)GPL does in no way preclude you–or anyone–from selling it. It does, however, require you to provide source code, at least upon request, to those that have received non-source code versions. That said, the specific arrangement in this case may be a bit strange. There's a "commercial end-user license agreement", which I'm pretty sure is not possible–unless they are the author of all the code in question, in which case they can make up as many licenses as they want.
toomuchtodo 10y ago
I think I'd rather just donate to the httpie developer to extend it to achieve this functionality.
- eliangcs 10y ago
  Would you rather do that because of the AGPL licensing? I ask because you don't have to donate or pay to use this tool unless you want to use the latest features earlier.
  - darkarmani 10y ago
    BSD license is a lot friendlier. If one is gaining experience with the codebase, it seems more useful to get experience with the BSD codebase, since one can then use that codebase in projects.
joemccall86 10y ago
Interesting. Reminds me of rest shell from a few years back. https://github.com/spring-projects/rest-shell https://github.com/spring-projects/rest-shell

56 points by eliangcs 10y ago

coldcode 10y ago

Open source on github with a paid subscription. Is this something new?

orph4nus 10y ago
Open Source Software (OSS) is not the same as Free Software (FS). And even with Free Software, the free doesn't mean necessarily Gratis. There is something called Free Open Source Software (FOSS), but even there the Free doesn't need to mean Gratis. Either way, I don't think there is something wrong with having a paid service, while still having your code being OSS. It means that you can access the code, and use the product for free, but you might want to pay for the services the company might offer on top of it. Not that I know if that's the case here, but you know, it's possible.
williamdclt 10y ago
Gratis != open-source != free (free is about liberty, not price) Any combination of these 3 principles is possible with the right license
- udkl 10y ago
  Instead of always commenting to resolve the ambiguity around the 'Free' in FOSS I feel we should instead use a different term. Say 'Modifiable'/'Liberal' Open Source Software ?
  - samb1729 10y ago
    'Libre' may be the term you're looking for
    - amelius 10y ago
      Is that even an English word?
      - udkl 10y ago
        "Libre /ˈliːbrə/ is a loan word in English[citation needed], borrowed from French and Spanish, used to describe something as being "free", in the sense of "having freedom" or "liberty". It is used in English to distinguish the two meanings of free: free as in freedom (libre) from free as in free of charge (gratis). Another sample is common: Free as "Free Speech", not as "Free Drink"!" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_(word) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_(word) But then the acronym will be 'LOSS' ..... enterprise managers would think twice before considering it ;).
eliangcs 10y ago
It's not new. One example I look up to is Sidekiq (http://sidekiq.org http://sidekiq.org). It offers a paid subscription for its pro version.
- AtheistOfFail 10y ago
  Right, but sidekiq's pro version isn't in a github repo. They host a private repo for you when you fork over the cash and discontinue it after a year.
  - eliangcs 10y ago
    HTTP Prompt paid version isn't on GitHub either. It's hosted on a private server only available for paid users.

droog 10y ago

From http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html: > Fork is a term invented by GitHub. No, it is not. Also, do I get royalties for my contributions to this open source project? Since you're literally selling other people a gated license to the code I contribute, I'm wondering how this works from a legal perspective.

JustSomeNobody 10y ago
> Fork is a term invented by GitHub. Amazing, isn't it? With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it.
- tradersam 10y ago
  > With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it. And yet, you still can't believe everything you read on the Internet.
  - JustSomeNobody 10y ago
    You can at least fact check who invented the term fork.
detaro 10y ago
Doing that without a Contributors License Agreement seems at the very least iffy. (AGPL + commercial isn't exactly unusual, but normally there is a CLA involved)
- matt4077 10y ago
  The (A)GPL does in no way preclude you–or anyone–from selling it. It does, however, require you to provide source code, at least upon request, to those that have received non-source code versions. That said, the specific arrangement in this case may be a bit strange. There's a "commercial end-user license agreement", which I'm pretty sure is not possible–unless they are the author of all the code in question, in which case they can make up as many licenses as they want.

toomuchtodo 10y ago

I think I'd rather just donate to the httpie developer to extend it to achieve this functionality.

eliangcs 10y ago
Would you rather do that because of the AGPL licensing? I ask because you don't have to donate or pay to use this tool unless you want to use the latest features earlier.
- darkarmani 10y ago
  BSD license is a lot friendlier. If one is gaining experience with the codebase, it seems more useful to get experience with the BSD codebase, since one can then use that codebase in projects.

joemccall86 10y ago

Interesting. Reminds me of rest shell from a few years back. https://github.com/spring-projects/rest-shell https://github.com/spring-projects/rest-shell