4 ms·
When I read "Open source alternative to ..." I always assume self-hosting is easily possible. However, lately most open source alternatives taking a very liter
by k__ 2y ago
When I read "Open source alternative to ..." I always assume self-hosting is easily possible.
However, lately most open source alternatives taking a very literal approach to open source which isn't always in the spirit of the term.
- simonw 2y agoWhen I see something that says it's Open Source I assume it means https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/osd - if it doesn't, I'm one of the "zealots" (to quote the linked article) who noisily complains about it.
- skeptrune 2y agoAgreed. Frustrates me to no end that some of the most loved OSS projects don't have quality helm/Kube guides and basically say "here's a docker compose, you're on your own." The "it's open source, but our operator is closed" makes my head steam sometimes. I wish they would just go source available so they can provide a higher quality product.
- bornfreddy 2y agoShow me the incentive and I'll tell you the outcome. FOSS doesn't give any provision to the original author, so why would they maintain it to a high quality standard?
- TheSecondMouse 2y agoI've noticed this a lot lately too. Convoluted install process for a non-production setup (without a guide for production quality), outdated docs; but only from open-source software that has a paid for SaaS variant (looking at you Supabase). Not that these companies owe me anything, but I do feel that these strategies diminish the open-source scene.