News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on An update to the Timescale license. Parent comment

Re:An update to the Timescale license by rectang on Thursday September 24, 2020 @04:47PM (#24583412)
You'd be in good company with Microsoft circa 2001 with their (source-available) Shared Source Initiative, because your argument is the same one that people have been making back then and ever since: that banning field-of-use restrictions imposes too much of a burden on commercial entities.

But disallowing such field-of-use restrictions is exactly what makes open source collaboration between otherwise competing companies possible. It is a fundamental difference between Open Source and Source Available licenses.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An update to the Timescale license by StavrosK on Thursday September 24, 2020 @04:48PM (#24583435)
Can you elaborate? What collaboration do you mean?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An update to the Timescale license by StopHammoTime on Thursday September 24, 2020 @06:36PM (#24584481)
Uhh, kubernetes would be an immediate example. A massive piece of software that has been adapted into every major cloud provider, with all those cloud providers working on that same piece of software.

While Google may have done it to make their own Cloud offering better, it ultimately has succeeded in saturating the container compute market and with their own success has brought plenty of competition.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An update to the Timescale license by StavrosK on Thursday September 24, 2020 @06:51PM (#24584607)
On the contrary, Google made Kubernetes precisely so they could commoditize every other cloud provider and then offer the strongest Kubernetes provider there is. When AWS is just a layer under Kubernetes, you can move your entire infrastructure to GCP by pushing your Kubernetes config to a different endpoint.

They succeeded quite well in that.

[ Parent | on HN ]