4 ms·

TBH i don't mind this, open-source means you can use the code, but you're not entitled to infra and services.

_cenw 2y ago
If you integrate your code to have hard dependencies on a third party server that is provided for free, that's as much part of an implicit social contract as is channeling a subset of earnings back at a project if you're successful. So it may be okay in this instance, but the no notice part is still bad. WordPress used to not even have a way to have plugins and themes that didn't ask to be updated via WP.org - so you could provoke an update to someone's private plugin if you knew its name. I know because I filed the bug that lead to it being fixed. But everything in this instance is making Matt and his company look bad. Their complaint seems to be that revisions are not enabled by default on WP Engine and this is somehow breaking the core philosophy of WordPress and the few bytes of text WP Engine saves are supposedly profit seeking, not a performance problem as WP Engine claims. Additionally, one of Matt's commercial ventures, Pressable, is currently offering to buy out your WP Engine contract if you switch to them. Breaking a competitors product and then offering to buy out their customers should be a red flag in choosing an open source solution.
- Raed667 2y ago
  I don't have a dog in this fight, but if you built a multi-million business around that code, it is just sane for you to patch the code so that your core business doesn't 100% depend on someone else's free service (plugin marketplace hosting for example) This entire situation screams drama but I can see where Matt is coming from, even though he could have handled things with more grace.
  - seb1204 2y ago
    I also don't have a dog in the fight but reading for a few minutes I have the impression there have been previous attempts to engage with WPE to contribute. I might be wrong.
    - Raed667 2y ago
      I think WPE committed to contributing 40h per week of work on WordPress. I'm not clear if they didn't fulfill their commitment or Matt thinks that is not enough.
batuhanicoz 2y ago
Infra, services and trademarks. They are not part of the GPL license. Everyone is welcomed to use any GPL code as they see fit, as long as they are within their limits as outlined in the license. But this does not mean W.ORG has to keep providing these free services to you and your customers, and it does not mean you are free to use trademarks in a misleading way. Disclaimer: I work at Automattic.
- mikeyinternews 2y ago
  I've been a WPE customer for about 3 years and have never been confused by the "WP" in their name.
  - seb1204 2y ago
    Would you agree that WPE automatically makes a mental connection to WordPress? I dare say this would not be the case if it was named Josh Mutton Engine JME
  - trvr 2y ago
    It's not about WP in the company name. It's about loosely using the words "Wordpress" and "WooCommerce" all over their website in ways that violate trademarks.
    - graeme 2y ago
      Could you please explain in which way trademarks were violated? Nominative use is explicitly allowed according to long established caselaw. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use
      - trvr 2y ago
        I'm not a lawyer, but WP Engine is selling products on their website literally named "Core Wordpress". That seems like it might be a violation.

If you integrate your code to have hard dependencies on a third party server that is provided for free, that's as much part of an implicit social contract as is channeling a subset of earnings back at a project if you're successful. So it may be okay in this instance, but the no notice part is still bad. WordPress used to not even have a way to have plugins and themes that didn't ask to be updated via WP.org - so you could provoke an update to someone's private plugin if you knew its name. I know because I filed the bug that lead to it being fixed. But everything in this instance is making Matt and his company look bad. Their complaint seems to be that revisions are not enabled by default on WP Engine and this is somehow breaking the core philosophy of WordPress and the few bytes of text WP Engine saves are supposedly profit seeking, not a performance problem as WP Engine claims. Additionally, one of Matt's commercial ventures, Pressable, is currently offering to buy out your WP Engine contract if you switch to them. Breaking a competitors product and then offering to buy out their customers should be a red flag in choosing an open source solution.

Raed667 2y ago
I don't have a dog in this fight, but if you built a multi-million business around that code, it is just sane for you to patch the code so that your core business doesn't 100% depend on someone else's free service (plugin marketplace hosting for example) This entire situation screams drama but I can see where Matt is coming from, even though he could have handled things with more grace.
- seb1204 2y ago
  I also don't have a dog in the fight but reading for a few minutes I have the impression there have been previous attempts to engage with WPE to contribute. I might be wrong.
  - Raed667 2y ago
    I think WPE committed to contributing 40h per week of work on WordPress. I'm not clear if they didn't fulfill their commitment or Matt thinks that is not enough.

batuhanicoz 2y ago

Infra, services and trademarks. They are not part of the GPL license. Everyone is welcomed to use any GPL code as they see fit, as long as they are within their limits as outlined in the license. But this does not mean W.ORG has to keep providing these free services to you and your customers, and it does not mean you are free to use trademarks in a misleading way. Disclaimer: I work at Automattic.

mikeyinternews 2y ago
I've been a WPE customer for about 3 years and have never been confused by the "WP" in their name.
- seb1204 2y ago
  Would you agree that WPE automatically makes a mental connection to WordPress? I dare say this would not be the case if it was named Josh Mutton Engine JME
- trvr 2y ago
  It's not about WP in the company name. It's about loosely using the words "Wordpress" and "WooCommerce" all over their website in ways that violate trademarks.
  - graeme 2y ago
    Could you please explain in which way trademarks were violated? Nominative use is explicitly allowed according to long established caselaw. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use
    - trvr 2y ago
      I'm not a lawyer, but WP Engine is selling products on their website literally named "Core Wordpress". That seems like it might be a violation.