4 ms·
The Apache License is branded to a single organization and that's doing fine.
by Hamuko 5y ago
The Apache License is branded to a single organization and that's doing fine.
- jillesvangurp 5y agoAnd so are the Eclipse License, The Mozilla Public License and probably a few others. Of course those licenses are generally understood to be open source licenses under the careful definitions and criteria that the free software foundation uses for this. The Elastic license isn't open enough to meet those criteria.
- tehbeard 5y agoKind of missing the detail that it's Apache Software Foundation (a non-profit that's community driven), where as Elastic is a publicly traded company?
- Hamuko 5y agoDoes that actually matter?
- tehbeard 5y agoOne of them operates as a collaborative group to maintain open source software and is well known for that within the development community with decades of proof. The other is a publicly traded company known for a single product (suite), and the licencing troubles they have faced when dealing with hyperscalers like AWS providing their product to their customers.
- Hamuko 5y agoI didn't ask what the difference between the two were, I asked if the difference somehow actually matters when discussing the license.