4 ms·

Not the OP, but I suspect HN has trimmed the anchor link. > https://github.com/opentffoundation/roadmap/issues/24#issuecomment-1699535216 https://github.com/op

Not the OP, but I suspect HN has trimmed the anchor link. > https://github.com/opentffoundation/roadmap/issues/24#issuecomment-1699535216 https://github.com/opentffoundation/roadmap/issues/24#issuec... That's the comment that made the issue clear -- specifically TOS were amended for https://registry.terraform.io https://registry.terraform.io to state: > You may download providers, modules, policy libraries and/or other Services or Content from this website __solely for use with, or in support of, HashiCorp Terraform.__ ie., it looks like the intent is "You can't use OpenTF with registry.terraform.io". IMO, that feels a little petty. But, I guess if OpenTF is taking a position of "Use us instead of Terraform", then they shouldn't expect to get the usage of Hashicorps infra.

benatkin 3y ago
This is the same situation as with Microsoft, Visual Studio Code, and OpenVSX. It's covered in depth here: https://ghuntley.com/fracture/ https://ghuntley.com/fracture/
Pet_Ant 3y ago
How would they even know when the protocol is identical? I mean this is hardly the least unethical thing a company would do.
dang 3y ago
Ok, I've put the anchor back up there.
sneak 3y ago
Is this even enforceable given the ruling about scraping? I don't have any rights to dictate what browser you use to accsss my website.
berniedurfee 3y ago
Very petty. I’ve been a longtime advocate and evangelist for Hashicorp products, but jeez. I felt they were ‘one of the good ones’ making great tech just to make great tech. Success and profit followed making great tech. How the mighty have fallen. Long live Terrafork I guess. Hashifork all their other stuff too I suppose. Very disappointing.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
paulgb 3y ago
> But, I guess if OpenTF is taking a position of "Use us instead of Terraform", then they shouldn't expect to get the usage of Hashicorps infra. It’s totally something they can do, but it seems short-sighted. They had to know that this wouldn’t actually stop the momentum around OpenTF, but just result in HashiCorp giving up the control they have over the canonical namespace. As precedent, Docker allows Kubernetes and Podman to access its registry, for example.
- throwaway103xx 3y ago
  If you look at it from a proprietary software company (which is what Hashicorp is now), it's totally expected and understandable. Why should they spend money supporting extra load on their infrastructure from people that are not directly paying for that? It makes perfect sense. Is it short-sighed? If you think they will go down in market share from now on, yes. But Hashicorp probably thinks it won't or it wouldn't have made the change in the first place. For them, it's all the way up from here.
  - paulgb 3y ago
    From my point of view, controlling the canonical namespace is a form of soft power in the ecosystem. Since as the post says, the actual files are hosted on GitHub, the cost of the extra load on their infrastructure is real but probably not material to a company of their size -- as I understand it, it's more like running a DNS service than a file host. So it _seems_ (the word I used above as well) from my perspective that they’re giving up a bunch of soft power for little gain, but it's very possible that I'm either wrong about the value of the soft power, or wrong about the cost of running the infra.
    - StopHammoTime 3y ago
      I published a terraform provider when the registry in beta while working at a startup. They do some “value ads” like code signing and such, but you’re right - it can functionally be replaced by the GitHub release page.
  - 3y ago

benatkin 3y ago

This is the same situation as with Microsoft, Visual Studio Code, and OpenVSX. It's covered in depth here: https://ghuntley.com/fracture/ https://ghuntley.com/fracture/

Pet_Ant 3y ago

How would they even know when the protocol is identical? I mean this is hardly the least unethical thing a company would do.

dang 3y ago

Ok, I've put the anchor back up there.

sneak 3y ago

Is this even enforceable given the ruling about scraping? I don't have any rights to dictate what browser you use to accsss my website.

berniedurfee 3y ago

Very petty. I’ve been a longtime advocate and evangelist for Hashicorp products, but jeez. I felt they were ‘one of the good ones’ making great tech just to make great tech. Success and profit followed making great tech. How the mighty have fallen. Long live Terrafork I guess. Hashifork all their other stuff too I suppose. Very disappointing.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

paulgb 3y ago

> But, I guess if OpenTF is taking a position of "Use us instead of Terraform", then they shouldn't expect to get the usage of Hashicorps infra. It’s totally something they can do, but it seems short-sighted. They had to know that this wouldn’t actually stop the momentum around OpenTF, but just result in HashiCorp giving up the control they have over the canonical namespace. As precedent, Docker allows Kubernetes and Podman to access its registry, for example.

throwaway103xx 3y ago
If you look at it from a proprietary software company (which is what Hashicorp is now), it's totally expected and understandable. Why should they spend money supporting extra load on their infrastructure from people that are not directly paying for that? It makes perfect sense. Is it short-sighed? If you think they will go down in market share from now on, yes. But Hashicorp probably thinks it won't or it wouldn't have made the change in the first place. For them, it's all the way up from here.
- paulgb 3y ago
  From my point of view, controlling the canonical namespace is a form of soft power in the ecosystem. Since as the post says, the actual files are hosted on GitHub, the cost of the extra load on their infrastructure is real but probably not material to a company of their size -- as I understand it, it's more like running a DNS service than a file host. So it _seems_ (the word I used above as well) from my perspective that they’re giving up a bunch of soft power for little gain, but it's very possible that I'm either wrong about the value of the soft power, or wrong about the cost of running the infra.
  - StopHammoTime 3y ago
    I published a terraform provider when the registry in beta while working at a startup. They do some “value ads” like code signing and such, but you’re right - it can functionally be replaced by the GitHub release page.
- 3y ago