HashiCorp was ticked off. CEO Dave McJannet snapped back: “Open source foundations are just a way for big companies to protect themselves from innovation.”
He added: “What does it say for the future of open source if foundations will just take it and give it a home? That is tragic for open source innovation. I will tell you, if that were to happen, there’ll be no more open source companies in Silicon Valley.”
Can somebody explain? I see words, but they don’t seem to carry any meaning.
I think he is claiming that Hashicorp is a small company and that open source foundations are a ploy by big companies (like Amazon, I guess) to keep code available to them. That way they can benefit from the innovation of others. Then this will put off companies from developing open source since they don’t want these big companies to profit off their hard work.
This is of course all total bollocks and he is just a greedy C-suite douchebag who is butthurt that the open source community wants to continue using the open source software that they helped create.
I’m guessing this person saw an open source license as a temporary means of spurring adoption of their software, and once enough of a market share had been built up, they’d stop publishing under an open license and have a sudden captive audience…apparently not understanding how any of this works.
Can somebody explain? I see words, but they don’t seem to carry any meaning.
I think he is claiming that Hashicorp is a small company and that open source foundations are a ploy by big companies (like Amazon, I guess) to keep code available to them. That way they can benefit from the innovation of others. Then this will put off companies from developing open source since they don’t want these big companies to profit off their hard work.
This is of course all total bollocks and he is just a greedy C-suite douchebag who is butthurt that the open source community wants to continue using the open source software that they helped create.
It’s bullshit. If they wanted Terraform to not be open source they should have chosen that license early.
With redis, the creator is on record saying that they will never change the license. http://antirez.com/news/120
I’m guessing this person saw an open source license as a temporary means of spurring adoption of their software, and once enough of a market share had been built up, they’d stop publishing under an open license and have a sudden captive audience…apparently not understanding how any of this works.