Re:Dragonfly Is Production Ready (and we raised $21M)
by dsrw on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @12:26PM
(#35248488)
It's a weird license that seems to say "you can use this as long as you don't compete with us", with an automatic switchover to Apache 2.0 in 5 years. Definitely better than closed source, but probably not Open Source by the OSI definition.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Dragonfly Is Production Ready (and we raised $21M)
by romange on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @12:43PM
(#35248783)
BSL license is more company-friendly than AGPL.
Re:Dragonfly Is Production Ready (and we raised $21M)
by madeofpalk on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @12:56PM
(#35249000)
Being company-friendly is a separate point from being open source.
Re:Dragonfly Is Production Ready (and we raised $21M)
by kakwa_ on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @03:44PM
(#35251490)
Restricting Usage or Distribution makes it de-facto not OSS.
It's actually a slightly different form of an old debate. I'm thinking in particular about the Crockford license (the MIT-like one with "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil." bit). It was determined to be non-free quite a while back due to such restrictions.
That being said, it hard to be a commercially successful software editor with an OSS model (RethinkDB comes to mind).
I do understand why BSL exists, but it feels to me like an unsatisfactory compromise.