3 ms·

What? For years I've been trying to get my teams to start using Elasticsearch and Kibana. For any project that relies on logging data and events, ES is a godse

• pietrovismara 6y ago
  I think you misunderstood the article. Only businesses like AWS that exploit FOSS to repackage it for profit should be concerned by this license. If you use it internally to store and analyze metrics/logs/whatever, than you're fine as you where before. Edit: The problem is the article itself that does a very bad job in explaining the problem. I think it's better to read directly from elastic: https://www.elastic.co/blog/licensing-change https://www.elastic.co/blog/licensing-change The "Why change" section explains it pretty well.
  • prohobo 6y ago
    I for sure didn't misunderstand the article itself, it says multiple times that everyone using it should be concerned. It seems like the article isn't very good though.
    • pietrovismara 6y ago
      You're right, I clarified in my edit that the article is misleading.
  • k__ 6y ago
    And Elasticsearch isn't even exploites very good by AWS. It always feels clunky to add it to a serverless architecture. Would be cool if they would create their own solution with on-demand pricing.
  • ProblemFactory 6y ago
    > businesses like AWS that exploit FOSS to repackage it for profit Exploit is questionable. A true open-source project like PostgreSQL only benefits from Amazon and Google offering it as a paid, hosted solution. It makes it easier to adopt, sell to decision-makers, and gain more user and developer mindshare over alternatives. If you are concerned with "competitors" offering your open-source project to more users, then perhaps being open source was just a poorly chosen marketing tactic that backfired.
    • logifail 6y ago
      > A true open-source project like PostgreSQL only benefits from Amazon and Google offering it as a paid, hosted solution I've been using PostgreSQL for a long time and I'm not clear how the open-source project benefits from being resold by planet-scale cloud providers. Can we have references for claims like this?
    • pietrovismara 6y ago
      > A true open-source project like PostgreSQL only benefits from Amazon and Google offering it as a paid, hosted solution And like, how? For a project to be exploited by tech corps usually the project itself needs to be already relevant and widely used across the industry. That's why it doesn't really need any publicity from AWS and that's why AWS "steals" it, their customers won't have to learn a new tool but can re-use their knowledge. Lower entry barrier = more customers. > If you are concerned with "competitors" offering your open-source project to more users, then perhaps being open source was just a poorly chosen marketing tactic that backfired. How free-markety of you. Now imagine that Elastic took your suggestion. They never made the elastic suite FOSS in the first place but only sold it as a closed source product. 1) It would have never got widely used in the industry 2) We would have never got a free open source tool that helped kick-start many other companies. You could say the same about Mongo. Imagine what impact it would have had on the startup world if Mongo wasn't a FOSS project. That's why it is fundamental to protect FOSS projects from corporate exploitation, in order to protect the whole tech eco-system.
      • luord 6y ago
• downrightmike 6y ago
  Areading314 3 minutes ago | unvote [–] This is an alarmist headline. The SSPL license to which they are switching only requires your code to be open sourced if you are providing Elasticsearch itself as a service. This change is directed at cloud providers who take open source software and then provide them as a service for payment without contributing to the project. If you are using Elasticsearch on your backend to build search-enabled products or websites, then this does not apply to you. So basically AWS needs to start coughing up money