3 ms·

Forget the server, what especially worries me is the client. For some weird reason the GUI clients for Windows, macOS and iOS are closed-source. I never under

Forget the server, what especially worries me is the client. For some weird reason the GUI clients for Windows, macOS and iOS are closed-source. I never understood exactly why that is, considering that the Linux and Android ones are fully open. The fact that there isn't a reason documented anywhere certainly worries me.

maxrev17 4y ago
Maybe the codebases need some tidying for open source, the chronology seems to make sense. I guess it isn't as simple as 'make repo public'.
- EMIRELADERO 4y ago
  I see no reason why the tidying couldn't be done in public. Why not make a public repo that's closed off to external influence until it's "tidy" enough?
  - maccard 4y ago
    If they use a proprietary third party library, they might not have a source distribution license of said library. The same way that you can't just unilaterally decalare an MIT licensed project is GPL without ensuring that all of the code was dual licensed or covered under a CLA. EDIT: I saw another comment that says that it's "just" the GUI applications for Windows and Mac that aren't open, but the core functionality is. I know that in Windows-land, it's _very_ common to use proprietary UI libraries like Telerik UI[0], or devexpress [1] [0] https://www.telerik.com/purchase/individual/winforms.aspx https://www.telerik.com/purchase/individual/winforms.aspx [1] https://www.devexpress.com/ https://www.devexpress.com/
Operyl 4y ago
They’ve said that closed source systems will keep the GUI closed source: https://tailscale.com/opensource/ https://tailscale.com/opensource/
- EMIRELADERO 4y ago
  That doesn't seem to make any sense. It's nice poetically I guess, but that's not the reason.
  - rob74 4y ago
    Maybe it doesn't make sense to you, and you may not agree with it, but if they state that this is the reason why they do it this way, then we should at least consider that it might actually be the reason why they do it this way.
lloeki 4y ago
One can install the FOSS client and daemon on macOS similarly to Linux: https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/wiki/Tailscaled-on-macOS https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/wiki/Tailscaled-on-ma... I do that mostly because it's running as a LaunchDaemon. > Forget the server Pop the headscale server in and you get a fully FOSS system. https://github.com/juanfont/headscale https://github.com/juanfont/headscale That I don't do, because the coordination server, the relay system (which you can also self-host), and the server side UI are really good. And also the public behaviour of the persons working at Tailscale as well as Tailscale's approach towards FOSS generally increase my level of trust in them. IOW they strike me as Nice Folks(TM), and if Nice Folks(TM) don't inspire confidence to you then you probably want to run the whole thing as described above. I mean, please read this in its entirety. They even have a "Encouraging Headscale" section. https://tailscale.com/opensource/ https://tailscale.com/opensource/
- EMIRELADERO 4y ago
  > I mean, please read this in its entirety. They even have a "Encouraging Headscale" section. Honestly that makes it even weirder. Usually companies will just not acknowledge that an open alternative that plugs into their existing product exists, and if they do it's for enforcement/diverting purposes ("Don't use this, please stick to the official stuff") If you're at a point where you acknowledge, accept, and even help the unofficial FOSS alternative, why not make your official stuff the same way?
  - chipsa 4y ago
    Product differentiation. If you run the head scale server, I’m not certain the funnel service will work. And there’s probably other stuff that is not planned to work with the FOSS coordinator server. And of course, one of the big things is: they don’t have to support anything with headscale, even if it’s sort of their software. Use the official stuff, and you get support. Pay, and you get better support.
- brirec 4y ago
  For that matter one can use Windows’s built-in WSL or Hyper-V functionality to run the Linux tailscale client, too. In fact, I do this anyway because their Windows client’s subnet router functionality is documented as being less performant than their FOSS client. I use my home desktop running Windows as a subnet router from tailscale into my home network, but when I read the note about performance I quickly installed Alpine Linux on a Hyper-V virtual machine and installed tailscale on there. That simple Alpine VM takes up so little resources that I don’t even notice any impact on performance with my 2009 12 core Xeon system. (This was a huge system, but I would imagine a modern low-midrange CPU would easily outperform it and likewise handle a micro-VM just as well) One static route added to my home router, and traffic flows both directions just fine. No need to install the client on any more machines on my network. This also saves on licensing, helping me stay within my free plan. :)
imhoguy 4y ago
Well, they need something closed source to keep customers and to not end up like Docker, Inc. /s
tksb 4y ago
I've had the same thought re: iOS/macOS clients. Oh how I would love to dive into those small codebases and add some simple QOL stuff. I've been watching but they don't seem to be adding any Apple-platforms focused roles/people, which is fine, but I wanna work at Tailscale…

maxrev17 4y ago

Maybe the codebases need some tidying for open source, the chronology seems to make sense. I guess it isn't as simple as 'make repo public'.

EMIRELADERO 4y ago
I see no reason why the tidying couldn't be done in public. Why not make a public repo that's closed off to external influence until it's "tidy" enough?
- maccard 4y ago
  If they use a proprietary third party library, they might not have a source distribution license of said library. The same way that you can't just unilaterally decalare an MIT licensed project is GPL without ensuring that all of the code was dual licensed or covered under a CLA. EDIT: I saw another comment that says that it's "just" the GUI applications for Windows and Mac that aren't open, but the core functionality is. I know that in Windows-land, it's _very_ common to use proprietary UI libraries like Telerik UI[0], or devexpress [1] [0] https://www.telerik.com/purchase/individual/winforms.aspx https://www.telerik.com/purchase/individual/winforms.aspx [1] https://www.devexpress.com/ https://www.devexpress.com/

Operyl 4y ago

They’ve said that closed source systems will keep the GUI closed source: https://tailscale.com/opensource/ https://tailscale.com/opensource/

EMIRELADERO 4y ago
That doesn't seem to make any sense. It's nice poetically I guess, but that's not the reason.
- rob74 4y ago
  Maybe it doesn't make sense to you, and you may not agree with it, but if they state that this is the reason why they do it this way, then we should at least consider that it might actually be the reason why they do it this way.

lloeki 4y ago

One can install the FOSS client and daemon on macOS similarly to Linux: https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/wiki/Tailscaled-on-macOS https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/wiki/Tailscaled-on-ma... I do that mostly because it's running as a LaunchDaemon. > Forget the server Pop the headscale server in and you get a fully FOSS system. https://github.com/juanfont/headscale https://github.com/juanfont/headscale That I don't do, because the coordination server, the relay system (which you can also self-host), and the server side UI are really good. And also the public behaviour of the persons working at Tailscale as well as Tailscale's approach towards FOSS generally increase my level of trust in them. IOW they strike me as Nice Folks(TM), and if Nice Folks(TM) don't inspire confidence to you then you probably want to run the whole thing as described above. I mean, please read this in its entirety. They even have a "Encouraging Headscale" section. https://tailscale.com/opensource/ https://tailscale.com/opensource/

EMIRELADERO 4y ago
> I mean, please read this in its entirety. They even have a "Encouraging Headscale" section. Honestly that makes it even weirder. Usually companies will just not acknowledge that an open alternative that plugs into their existing product exists, and if they do it's for enforcement/diverting purposes ("Don't use this, please stick to the official stuff") If you're at a point where you acknowledge, accept, and even help the unofficial FOSS alternative, why not make your official stuff the same way?
- chipsa 4y ago
  Product differentiation. If you run the head scale server, I’m not certain the funnel service will work. And there’s probably other stuff that is not planned to work with the FOSS coordinator server. And of course, one of the big things is: they don’t have to support anything with headscale, even if it’s sort of their software. Use the official stuff, and you get support. Pay, and you get better support.
brirec 4y ago
For that matter one can use Windows’s built-in WSL or Hyper-V functionality to run the Linux tailscale client, too. In fact, I do this anyway because their Windows client’s subnet router functionality is documented as being less performant than their FOSS client. I use my home desktop running Windows as a subnet router from tailscale into my home network, but when I read the note about performance I quickly installed Alpine Linux on a Hyper-V virtual machine and installed tailscale on there. That simple Alpine VM takes up so little resources that I don’t even notice any impact on performance with my 2009 12 core Xeon system. (This was a huge system, but I would imagine a modern low-midrange CPU would easily outperform it and likewise handle a micro-VM just as well) One static route added to my home router, and traffic flows both directions just fine. No need to install the client on any more machines on my network. This also saves on licensing, helping me stay within my free plan. :)

imhoguy 4y ago

Well, they need something closed source to keep customers and to not end up like Docker, Inc. /s

tksb 4y ago

I've had the same thought re: iOS/macOS clients. Oh how I would love to dive into those small codebases and add some simple QOL stuff. I've been watching but they don't seem to be adding any Apple-platforms focused roles/people, which is fine, but I wanna work at Tailscale…