4 ms·

We're huge fans of Sentry and have it deeply integrated in our products. The fully open source nature has helped us a ton with these advanced integrations, bein

We're huge fans of Sentry and have it deeply integrated in our products. The fully open source nature has helped us a ton with these advanced integrations, being able to look at the code to see exactly what is happening instead of relying on docs (which are great as well, not faulting them). At the same time, I remember seeing a new startup that had completely ripped off Sentry + docs and had just done a find and replace for the company name. I thought I had read about it on HN but I can't find the link. It's clear we need a license that allows software to be developed in the open but prevents this type abuse. I don't know if this license is the solution. It clearly isn't open source and should not be construed as such (they are very clear about this in the post), but I haven't seen other better proposals either. Armchair criticism is easy, and this seems like a reasonable middle-ground. We'll keep using Sentry and continue to be customers. Outside of their Sentry.io product, they have released and contributed to a ton of other Open Source libraries. As I understand it, that will continue. For me, this passes the sniff test.

sangnoir 7y ago
> It's clear we need a license that allows software to be developed in the open but prevents this type abuse. The ability to fork is the point of open source, because it assures continuity. The price of this is the non-zero probability of hostile forks (which I would not classify as 'abuse'). I think there's a section of technologist who license their software for pragmatic (traction, fixing bugs) and not ideological reasons and get surprised when someone forks the project in a way they don't like.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- simplyinfinity 7y ago
  You can fork it, you can mod it. But you cannot sell forked sentry as a service to companies. If companies want sentry they can host it themselves and you can provide customization/support services for that.
  - Spivak 7y ago
    > But you cannot sell forked sentry as a service to companies? But why not? That seems like such an arbitrary distinction if it weren't for the fact that the company is trying to profit on being the exclusive hosted provider of the software. Why wouldn't I want to pay a company that's better at ops to host sentry for me?
    - SparkyMcUnicorn 7y ago
      Better at ops? do they have issues? The options are: Use Sentry.io, host it yourself, or use something else.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - ryan_lane 7y ago
    It's possible to fork all of the repos until the first change is introduced with the new license. So, if you want to fork at any point in time, it's going to be based on the last release prior to the new license.
londons_explore 7y ago
Ripping off someone else's project and doing a 'find and replace' of the name is IMO morally fine. If they can do a better job of marketing with that new name, they deserve the success.
- guptaneil 7y ago
  Let's say 2 companies raise $10 million each. One company spends $8 million on R&D and $2 million on marketing. The other company re-uses the former company's open source work and pours all $10 million into marketing. Who will win? Who should win?
  - jwkane 7y ago
    ^^ this is exactly the right way to approach this. The answer is not obvious, not to me anyway. The $10 million marketing company will crush the original company, the product will wither without technical backing and fade into obsolescence. Long term everyone loses. How can we change the rules of the game (license?) so the end users win. It would please my personal sense of justice if the big R&D company also won, but I am satisfied with the simpler requirement of end users not getting shafted and the product thriving.
  - capableweb 7y ago
    What does "win" mean here? Survives 5 years without being bankrupt/bought? Has a high valuation? Survives 20 years? It's no guarantee that a company with 10/2 of marketing/R&D split would be any better than the other company with 2/10 of marketing/R&D.
- MFLoon 7y ago
  Is it morally fine in every case? Or just in cases where the project was initially open source? If the latter, why, and why should anyone try to maintain an open source business if that's the case? Anyway, "morals" aren't the standard by which these things are judged in practice, ethics via laws are, and I'm fairly certain most legal systems don't see the practice of IP theft as fine.
martey 7y ago
> At the same time, I remember seeing a new startup that had completely ripped off Sentry + docs and had just done a find and replace for the company name. Did you mean Opbeat? They did use Sentry client code in their service implementation (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800833) but their focus was on APM not exception management.
- nathancahill 7y ago
  It wasn't Opbeat. But from that same thread, interesting to see how zeeg's views on licensing have changed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800893 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800893

sangnoir 7y ago

> It's clear we need a license that allows software to be developed in the open but prevents this type abuse. The ability to fork is the point of open source, because it assures continuity. The price of this is the non-zero probability of hostile forks (which I would not classify as 'abuse'). I think there's a section of technologist who license their software for pragmatic (traction, fixing bugs) and not ideological reasons and get surprised when someone forks the project in a way they don't like.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
simplyinfinity 7y ago
You can fork it, you can mod it. But you cannot sell forked sentry as a service to companies. If companies want sentry they can host it themselves and you can provide customization/support services for that.
- Spivak 7y ago
  > But you cannot sell forked sentry as a service to companies? But why not? That seems like such an arbitrary distinction if it weren't for the fact that the company is trying to profit on being the exclusive hosted provider of the software. Why wouldn't I want to pay a company that's better at ops to host sentry for me?
  - SparkyMcUnicorn 7y ago
    Better at ops? do they have issues? The options are: Use Sentry.io, host it yourself, or use something else.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- ryan_lane 7y ago
  It's possible to fork all of the repos until the first change is introduced with the new license. So, if you want to fork at any point in time, it's going to be based on the last release prior to the new license.

londons_explore 7y ago

Ripping off someone else's project and doing a 'find and replace' of the name is IMO morally fine. If they can do a better job of marketing with that new name, they deserve the success.

guptaneil 7y ago
Let's say 2 companies raise $10 million each. One company spends $8 million on R&D and $2 million on marketing. The other company re-uses the former company's open source work and pours all $10 million into marketing. Who will win? Who should win?
- jwkane 7y ago
  ^^ this is exactly the right way to approach this. The answer is not obvious, not to me anyway. The $10 million marketing company will crush the original company, the product will wither without technical backing and fade into obsolescence. Long term everyone loses. How can we change the rules of the game (license?) so the end users win. It would please my personal sense of justice if the big R&D company also won, but I am satisfied with the simpler requirement of end users not getting shafted and the product thriving.
- capableweb 7y ago
  What does "win" mean here? Survives 5 years without being bankrupt/bought? Has a high valuation? Survives 20 years? It's no guarantee that a company with 10/2 of marketing/R&D split would be any better than the other company with 2/10 of marketing/R&D.
MFLoon 7y ago
Is it morally fine in every case? Or just in cases where the project was initially open source? If the latter, why, and why should anyone try to maintain an open source business if that's the case? Anyway, "morals" aren't the standard by which these things are judged in practice, ethics via laws are, and I'm fairly certain most legal systems don't see the practice of IP theft as fine.

martey 7y ago

> At the same time, I remember seeing a new startup that had completely ripped off Sentry + docs and had just done a find and replace for the company name. Did you mean Opbeat? They did use Sentry client code in their service implementation (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800833) but their focus was on APM not exception management.

nathancahill 7y ago
It wasn't Opbeat. But from that same thread, interesting to see how zeeg's views on licensing have changed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800893 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800893