4 ms·
It is pretty well accepted that "open source" in the context of software is referring to the OSI's Open Source Definition. Elastic themselves say they're not ca
by ryukafalz 4y ago
It is pretty well accepted that "open source" in the context of software is referring to the OSI's Open Source Definition. Elastic themselves say they're not calling Elasticsearch open source:
> Does this mean that Elasticsearch and Kibana are no longer Open Source?
> Yes. Neither the Elastic License nor SSPL have been approved by the OSI, so to prevent confusion, we no longer refer to Elasticsearch or Kibana as open source. We updated our website and our messaging to refer to these products as “Free & Open,” and when talking about the licenses directly, we describe them as “source-available.” If you notice an area we missed, please let us know, so we can correct it.
https://www.elastic.co/pricing/faq/licensing https://www.elastic.co/pricing/faq/licensing
- phpisthebest 4y agoOSI has become corporatized with their "approvals"... I am not sure anyone should care what OSI thinks about a given license
- pydry 4y ago>It is pretty well accepted that "open source" in the context of software is referring to the OSI To the corporate funded OSI. I know. The same corporate OSI who joined in the character assassination attacks on Richard "open source comes before profit" Stallman for very similar reasons.
- ryukafalz 4y agoIf you'd prefer, here's Stallman saying the FSF hasn't gotten around to examining the SSPL but expecting it won't be considered a free software license either: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2021-10/msg00806.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2021-10/msg00...