3 ms·

Being MIT licensed, does that mean that another company could also offer this as a hosted solution? Did you think about encumbering with a license that allowed

Being MIT licensed, does that mean that another company could also offer this as a hosted solution? Did you think about encumbering with a license that allowed commercial use, but prohibited resale? Also, somewhat related, years ago I wrote a very small framework for fan-out of Django-based tasks in Celery. We have been running it in production for years. It doesn't have adoption beyond our company, but I think there are some good ideas in it. Feel free to take a look if it's of interest! https://github.com/groveco/django-sprinklers https://github.com/groveco/django-sprinklers

tracker1 2y ago
I'm not sure that it matters... all the cloud providers has simple queues and more complex orchestrators available already. I do think their cloud offering is interesting, and being PostgreSQL backed is a big plus for in-house development.
911e 2y ago
I’m also interested in understand the context for MIT instead of dual licensing for commercial needs, what’s the current best strategy ?
bbor 2y ago
I feel like just rehosting an actively maintained github repo would draw significant negative PR. And even if not, I feel like part of this business plan revolves around becoming a relatively big part of the ecosystem; one or two cloud providers potentially poaching your customers with a drop down option could easily be worth more in advertising than you’re losing in subscription dollars. I’m guessing :shrug:
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
abelanger 2y ago
Very cool! Does it support the latest version of Celery? And to answer the question, no, the license doesn't restrict a company from offering a hosted version of Hatchet. We chose the license that we'd want to see if we were making a decision to adopt Hatchet. That said, managing and running the cloud version is significantly from a version meant for one org -- the infra surrounding the cloud version manages hundreds and eventually thousands of different tenants. While it's all the same open-source engine + API, there's a lot of work required to distribute the different engine components in a way that's reliable and supports partitioning databases between tenants.

tracker1 2y ago

I'm not sure that it matters... all the cloud providers has simple queues and more complex orchestrators available already. I do think their cloud offering is interesting, and being PostgreSQL backed is a big plus for in-house development.

911e 2y ago

I’m also interested in understand the context for MIT instead of dual licensing for commercial needs, what’s the current best strategy ?

bbor 2y ago

I feel like just rehosting an actively maintained github repo would draw significant negative PR. And even if not, I feel like part of this business plan revolves around becoming a relatively big part of the ecosystem; one or two cloud providers potentially poaching your customers with a drop down option could easily be worth more in advertising than you’re losing in subscription dollars. I’m guessing :shrug:

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

abelanger 2y ago

Very cool! Does it support the latest version of Celery? And to answer the question, no, the license doesn't restrict a company from offering a hosted version of Hatchet. We chose the license that we'd want to see if we were making a decision to adopt Hatchet. That said, managing and running the cloud version is significantly from a version meant for one org -- the infra surrounding the cloud version manages hundreds and eventually thousands of different tenants. While it's all the same open-source engine + API, there's a lot of work required to distribute the different engine components in a way that's reliable and supports partitioning databases between tenants.