4 ms·
Too late. We just deployed a new project with OpenSearch after learning from an Elastic salesperson that their licensing fees would eat up significant portions
by 9cb14c1ec0 2y ago
Too late. We just deployed a new project with OpenSearch after learning from an Elastic salesperson that their licensing fees would eat up significant portions of the projects profits. Also, since it's not spelled out clearly, I'm supposing huge parts of vital functionality are still subject to a paid license, even if the core functionality is technically open source now.
- remram 2y agoPlus they lost all trust now. Who's to say they won't pull the same thing again if developers were to come back? It's not like they stopped requiring a CLA...
- KingMob 2y agoTo be fair, though, every project of a certain size requires you to sign away your rights via CLA, so I don't think that can be held against them. (Though I admit, dispensing with a CLA would be an amazing gesture of good will.)
- purpleidea 2y agoThis is not at all true. Only projects that have the intention of wanting to be able to screw over their users have a CLA. The obvious counter example is Linux which has no CLA.
- remram 2y agoOn the other hand, the Apache foundation asks for a CLA.
- dblock 2y agoOpenSearch only requires DCO. https://github.com/opensearch-project/.github/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#developer-certificate-of-origin https://github.com/opensearch-project/.github/blob/main/CONT...
- wg0 2y agoBit hard to trust - plus OpenSearch would continue to go strong because lot many companies have built business on top of it. Most of the centralised logging providers come to mind. Grafana and Elasticsearch with their AGPL, are not deployable for teams that don't even want to provide a competing service because even basic security features (group membership via external OAuth source for example) are only available in Enterprise Edition (TM)