3 ms·
Everything that you side was said of Terraform months back, and of some other organisation before that. It is very unambiguous that this is part of a move to a
by WhyNotHugo 3y ago
Everything that you side was said of Terraform months back, and of some other organisation before that.
It is very unambiguous that this is part of a move to an open-core model. I would not consider this project open source any more, even though it still technically is so for now.
- freedomben 3y agoI don't know about "everything" but yes I agree, there are a lot of similarities here. There is definitely a possibility (maybe even probability) that Element is going to release proprietary versions with "extensions" to general customers, in ways that core would benefit from but they withhold for competitive advantage. I really hope they don't do that, but they could. Definitely we should watch them closely and with a skeptical eye, and we should call them out if they do that.
- kuschku 3y agoThe point isn't to move to open core, but to stop competitors from building proprietary products on top of an open source project without giving back. It's precisely what the (A)GPL was made for and it's something even Stallman and the FSF agree with.
- nani8ot 3y agoIn a way Element already develops with an open-core model because of special features for customers that aren't useful for the wider ecosystem. E.g. adjustments for the healtcare sector. Element has existing contracts with companies and governments about permissively licensed software. They can't relicense to AGPL without a CLA to honor their existing contracts without much work.