4 ms·

> "We proposed to give back jointly at a significant level and were turned down." Adrian Cockcroft (VP AWS) https://twitter.com/adrianco/status/110517807449937

• SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
  We have no idea what “significant level” means here.
  • kapilvt 6y ago
    ~1k lines (per enumerated prs in blog post) against millions of lines, aka less than a fraction of a percent.. plus ignoring code review, issue triaged etc. insignificant level might be more apt.
    • __blockcipher__ 6y ago
      Amazon is literally under no obligation to contribute any code back. Yet they do because most people prefer to merge upstream if they can, and Amazon is no exception. Frankly Elastic has been very hostile at accepting PRs if they seem like they’d compete with Elastic’s proprietary offerings. Glaring conflict of interest. So I’m glad Elastic forced a full fork. BTW, in case you didn’t realize this license change will not prevent Amazon from running their own fork. So even from a greedy business perspective Elastic made a horrible decision, even ignoring the ethics of lying to the community as they have done repeatedly and without showing any remorse. edit: Fixed typo where I wrote "Elastic" instead of "Amazon" when talking about Amazon being no exception to preferring to merge upstream where possible
• jeswin 6y ago
  There's a good quote on that thread which captures what AWS is doing with products like ElasticSearch: "My argument is that AWS is eating seed grain, on its supply side, and doesn't know it."