Re:Grafana, Loki, and Tempo will be relicensed to AGPLv3
by josephcsible on Tuesday April 20, 2021 @01:43PM
(#26877899)
Amazon forking ElasticSearch to keep its old license is a good thing, since ElasticSearch's new license is a proprietary visible-source license. Grafana's new license is still FOSS, so it's really not a fair comparison.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Grafana, Loki, and Tempo will be relicensed to AGPLv3
by papito on Tuesday April 20, 2021 @04:14PM
(#26880930)
Elastic made a massive blunder by open-sourcing Kibana. SumoLogic just took it and builtnon that. You open-source the underlying technology - not the product built on top of it.
Re:Grafana, Loki, and Tempo will be relicensed to AGPLv3
by burmanm on Tuesday April 20, 2021 @04:23PM
(#26881067)
Kibana was open source before they formed the company.
Re:Grafana, Loki, and Tempo will be relicensed to AGPLv3
by hutrdvnj on Tuesday April 20, 2021 @02:39PM
(#26879108)
While it is true that Grafana's new license is still FOSS not every company, public cloud provider is willing to accept the AGPLv3 license[1]. Hence a fork with the old license is not unlikely.
Re:Grafana, Loki, and Tempo will be relicensed to AGPLv3
by sitkack on Tuesday April 20, 2021 @03:25PM
(#26880089)
Google has the same OSS philosophy as Microsoft and the rest of the software community needs to pressure Google to change its stance on the AGPL.
Re:Grafana, Loki, and Tempo will be relicensed to AGPLv3
by crazypython on Tuesday April 20, 2021 @04:55PM
(#26881535)
That document is based on lies. AGPLv3 does not force you to make code running on a different server open-source.
Re:Grafana, Loki, and Tempo will be relicensed to AGPLv3
by josephcsible on Tuesday April 20, 2021 @02:50PM
(#26879365)
True, but my point wasn't so much about the likelihood of a fork as whether or not it would be a good thing.