3 ms·

Yeah, "Open core" doesn't have a great definition. Certainly I agree this is a pretty contained feature, and I shouldn't have written "switching ... to an open

Yeah, "Open core" doesn't have a great definition. Certainly I agree this is a pretty contained feature, and I shouldn't have written "switching ... to an open core model" given the evidence in this thread. But "Element Matrix Services" (aka New Vector) launching and marketing a product/feature that is not open source is AFAIK something new, and it'd be very surprising if this is the last such feature they announce. (Before today, they were one of the very few examples I knew of a VC-funded open source company where their product remained entirely open source.)

blendergeek 5y ago
This is definitely an "open core" business model and you were right to call it what it is. While right now, the "core" is still fairly large and the proprietary addons are fairly small, it is not hard to see New Vector making more features proprietary additions.
Arathorn 5y ago
This may be a matter of definitions, but I really don't think that it's correct to describe this as open core. First of all, Matrix itself is a non-profit foundation, and absolutely everything it does is FOSS, and accepts contributions from everywhere. The majority come from Element (formerly New Vector) though, the for-profit that the original Matrix team set up in order to work on Matrix full time. Element has always had some closed-source bits in addition to all the FOSS work we do for Matrix. For instance, the EMS hosting platform itself (lots of stripe + kubernetes) is all proprietary and always has been. The default integration manager (codenamed Scalar) is too. And occasionally we've built random apps and bots and bridges which we chose to keep closed source - e.g. we've had a closed-source Sametime bridge for ages, and we have closed-source border gateways, cross-domain controllers, audit bots, etc too. However, *this doesn't make Matrix open core*, any more than the existence of closed-source webapps makes the Web "open core". It also doesn't make Element "open core", any more than (say) Mozilla is "open core" just because they haven't released the source for some of the random services they run too. In an ideal world, Element would release all of its IP as FOSS - and it's quite possible that we'll do that in future. But right now we're still experimenting with the right balance.
- worstbranding 5y ago
  You changed the name of the company to match the renamed client? Besides the weird use of a nonprofit to distract from your for profit business, for unknown reasons since there's nothing shameful about making profit to support your endeavors, your business has the absolute worst and most confusing branding I've ever encountered. Matrix was never a great name, and confuses people. Riot was named after violence, but Element sounds like nothing, and now you've introduced a namespace collision for no good reason between the renamed product and the company. What's next, rename Synapse to Element Server and Matrix to The Element Protocol? It's like you want to lose
  - Arathorn 5y ago
    I feel flattered that you registered a throwaway just to rant about the horror of a company who shares the same name as their product :D (c.f. Slack, Mattermost, Rocket.chat, Zulip, Airtable, Figma, Sketch... in fact, it's hard to think of a company outside old school megacorps like Microsoft and Adobe who don't name their company and product the same thing!)

blendergeek 5y ago

This is definitely an "open core" business model and you were right to call it what it is. While right now, the "core" is still fairly large and the proprietary addons are fairly small, it is not hard to see New Vector making more features proprietary additions.

Arathorn 5y ago

This may be a matter of definitions, but I really don't think that it's correct to describe this as open core. First of all, Matrix itself is a non-profit foundation, and absolutely everything it does is FOSS, and accepts contributions from everywhere. The majority come from Element (formerly New Vector) though, the for-profit that the original Matrix team set up in order to work on Matrix full time. Element has always had some closed-source bits in addition to all the FOSS work we do for Matrix. For instance, the EMS hosting platform itself (lots of stripe + kubernetes) is all proprietary and always has been. The default integration manager (codenamed Scalar) is too. And occasionally we've built random apps and bots and bridges which we chose to keep closed source - e.g. we've had a closed-source Sametime bridge for ages, and we have closed-source border gateways, cross-domain controllers, audit bots, etc too. However, *this doesn't make Matrix open core*, any more than the existence of closed-source webapps makes the Web "open core". It also doesn't make Element "open core", any more than (say) Mozilla is "open core" just because they haven't released the source for some of the random services they run too. In an ideal world, Element would release all of its IP as FOSS - and it's quite possible that we'll do that in future. But right now we're still experimenting with the right balance.

worstbranding 5y ago
You changed the name of the company to match the renamed client? Besides the weird use of a nonprofit to distract from your for profit business, for unknown reasons since there's nothing shameful about making profit to support your endeavors, your business has the absolute worst and most confusing branding I've ever encountered. Matrix was never a great name, and confuses people. Riot was named after violence, but Element sounds like nothing, and now you've introduced a namespace collision for no good reason between the renamed product and the company. What's next, rename Synapse to Element Server and Matrix to The Element Protocol? It's like you want to lose
- Arathorn 5y ago
  I feel flattered that you registered a throwaway just to rant about the horror of a company who shares the same name as their product :D (c.f. Slack, Mattermost, Rocket.chat, Zulip, Airtable, Figma, Sketch... in fact, it's hard to think of a company outside old school megacorps like Microsoft and Adobe who don't name their company and product the same thing!)