8 ms·

What’s the executive summary of what’s going on with Mongo, and why other commenters are referring to using mongo as a mistake?

by elamje 7y ago

tedivm 7y ago
MongoDB changed their licensed from an open source license to one that has restrictions specifically aimed at busting up Mongo (the company)'s competitors who offer managed MongoDB services. These restrictions mean it is no longer an open source project. It is also worrying for a lot of people that mongo was willing to change license terms like this, as it means they may be willing to do so in the future if it brings them more money. Since mongo has reached the point where they're competing on license terms, not on service or via their product, mongodb may not be the best choice for someone starting a new project. At this point lots of other options exist, with stable and open source solutions like postgres having document store features built in as well. In fact for a lot of use cases postgres already performs much better than mongodb, leaving the real question to be why anyone would choose to use mongodb at this point.
- SamReidHughes 7y ago
  > It is also worrying for a lot of people that mongo was willing to change license terms like this, as it means they may be willing to do so in the future if it brings them more money. Ultimately this is only a worry for people who choose software that is apparently not good enough right now, but hope it will become good enough in the future.
  - makomk 7y ago
    It's a worry for people who choose software that they need to work in the future full stop. As someone else pointed out elsewhere in the thread, this is being removed partly because the previous open source version of MongoDB no longer builds from source, apparently due to some change to the toolchain or libraries. Normally you'd upgrade or backport upstream's fix, but that's no longer possible in a situation like this.
- colordrops 7y ago
  Couldn't someone just fork on the last fully open source version of Mongo, similar to the genesis of CentOS?
  - hartator 7y ago
    We should do that definitely.
  - ken 7y ago
    Following the links here: "mongodb and mongodb@3.6 do not build from source anymore" -> "We gave up on this as we have no clue on how to fix the build, or it would take too much time."
floatingatoll 7y ago
Monsanto provides you genetic code packed into a seed and forbids you from profiting from new seeds derived from it by your own work. Is this ethical? Mongo provides you computer code packed into a tarball and forbids you from profiting from new code derived from it by your own work. Is this ethical? Is either example more or less ethical if the price is, or is not, $0? That’s the debate in a nutshell. (I declare no position on either scenario presented, and will not, so that the explanation stands apart from my ethical opinions.)
- gwd 7y ago
  > Mongo provides you computer code packed into a tarball and forbids you from profiting from new code derived from it by your own work. Is this ethical? I don't have any problems with it ethically: if they did the work and own the copyrights, they can make whatever conditions they want as far as I'm concerned. It's just not open source.
- threeseed 7y ago
  Is the GPL ethical ? It also gives you source code but attaches some pretty significant conditions that in most cases would prevent you from profiting from new code derived from it.
  - chii 7y ago
    only if your source of profit is obtained by restricting the customer from being able to use your code in any way they see fit (including modifying it).
    - threeseed 7y ago
      Most businesses make a profit by offering some unique product or service. With the GPL someone could take your unique product, make it their product, undercut you on price and then put you out of business. GPL is unquestionably great for consumers. Not so great for commercial businesses.
      - 7y ago

What’s the executive summary of what’s going on with Mongo, and why other commenters are referring to using mongo as a mistake?

by elamje 7y ago

What’s the executive summary of what’s going on with Mongo, and why other commenters are referring to using mongo as a mistake?

tedivm 7y ago

MongoDB changed their licensed from an open source license to one that has restrictions specifically aimed at busting up Mongo (the company)'s competitors who offer managed MongoDB services. These restrictions mean it is no longer an open source project. It is also worrying for a lot of people that mongo was willing to change license terms like this, as it means they may be willing to do so in the future if it brings them more money. Since mongo has reached the point where they're competing on license terms, not on service or via their product, mongodb may not be the best choice for someone starting a new project. At this point lots of other options exist, with stable and open source solutions like postgres having document store features built in as well. In fact for a lot of use cases postgres already performs much better than mongodb, leaving the real question to be why anyone would choose to use mongodb at this point.

SamReidHughes 7y ago
> It is also worrying for a lot of people that mongo was willing to change license terms like this, as it means they may be willing to do so in the future if it brings them more money. Ultimately this is only a worry for people who choose software that is apparently not good enough right now, but hope it will become good enough in the future.
- makomk 7y ago
  It's a worry for people who choose software that they need to work in the future full stop. As someone else pointed out elsewhere in the thread, this is being removed partly because the previous open source version of MongoDB no longer builds from source, apparently due to some change to the toolchain or libraries. Normally you'd upgrade or backport upstream's fix, but that's no longer possible in a situation like this.
colordrops 7y ago
Couldn't someone just fork on the last fully open source version of Mongo, similar to the genesis of CentOS?
- hartator 7y ago
  We should do that definitely.
- ken 7y ago
  Following the links here: "mongodb and mongodb@3.6 do not build from source anymore" -> "We gave up on this as we have no clue on how to fix the build, or it would take too much time."

floatingatoll 7y ago

Monsanto provides you genetic code packed into a seed and forbids you from profiting from new seeds derived from it by your own work. Is this ethical? Mongo provides you computer code packed into a tarball and forbids you from profiting from new code derived from it by your own work. Is this ethical? Is either example more or less ethical if the price is, or is not, $0? That’s the debate in a nutshell. (I declare no position on either scenario presented, and will not, so that the explanation stands apart from my ethical opinions.)

gwd 7y ago
> Mongo provides you computer code packed into a tarball and forbids you from profiting from new code derived from it by your own work. Is this ethical? I don't have any problems with it ethically: if they did the work and own the copyrights, they can make whatever conditions they want as far as I'm concerned. It's just not open source.
threeseed 7y ago
Is the GPL ethical ? It also gives you source code but attaches some pretty significant conditions that in most cases would prevent you from profiting from new code derived from it.
- chii 7y ago
  only if your source of profit is obtained by restricting the customer from being able to use your code in any way they see fit (including modifying it).
  - threeseed 7y ago
    Most businesses make a profit by offering some unique product or service. With the GPL someone could take your unique product, make it their product, undercut you on price and then put you out of business. GPL is unquestionably great for consumers. Not so great for commercial businesses.
    - 7y ago