3 ms·

I wonder how this affects Pulumi

• yellowapple 3y ago
  It makes it a lot more attractive, as long as they don't hop on the same BUSL bandwagon.
  • rantthrowaway69 3y ago
    [flagged]
  • rnmkr 3y ago
    It's just a matter of time. They're Apache 2.0 for now. But they can pull out at any moment just like Hashicorp, Grafana, Mongo any many others..
    • yellowapple 3y ago
      Indeed they can. Until they do so, however, I'm inclined to give it a second look.
• danw1979 3y ago
  Your line of thinking was that Pulumi uses terraform providers under the hood, right ? It’s a good question. I suspect several forks might be happening as we speak.
  • wlonkly 3y ago
    I believe providers are still OSS-licensed.
    • danw1979 3y ago
      Correct, according to the Hashicorp license change FAQ - https://www.hashicorp.com/license-faq#How-does-this-impact-the-licensing-of-Terraform-providers https://www.hashicorp.com/license-faq#How-does-this-impact-t... And I checked the contribution guide for the aws provider, no mention of a CLA there. I wonder if Hashicorp would be able to pull the providers under the same BSL in future ?
      • wlonkly 3y ago
        My understanding is that a _lot_ of the AWS provider was written by AWS developers on the clock. I think that pattern holds true for a lot of "official" providers. For that reason I don't expect to see BSL for providers.