Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by habibur 1367 days ago
Business source license.

Free for personal or commercial use. But service providers have to pay if they offer this database as a service.

5 comments

Wow yeah that's true! I was interested in looking closer into Surrealdb until I noticed this.

The LICENSE file even contains the following part:

> The Business Source License (this document, or the “License”) is not an Open Source license. However, the Licensed Work will eventually be made available under an Open Source License, as stated in this License.

And README mentions nothing about FOSS/OSS, so seems the submitter here on HN added it themselves to the title. Should be removed.

The term `FOSS` should be removed from the title
It is now removed.
But the good part of BSL is that after 4 years it becomes true FLOSS, in this case Apache v2.

However, it is improper to call it FLOSS. Maybe "eventually FLOSS".

Eventually open source is something I really do like, but it should have clear, measurable and open milestones for doing so. Like Open Accounting to show ‘if we reach 100k’ or something like that. Or if we reach 1000 contributors or if we reach 50k in donations. One thing bloody ETH would be useful for; it would be impossible to hide and you cannot change your mind on when the switch flips.
It’s all there in the license: https://github.com/surrealdb/surrealdb/blob/main/LICENSE. It reverts to Apache-2.0 after four years of the release of a particular version, or on 2026-01-01, whichever comes first.

(This means that if the Change Date is not altered before then, none of SurrealDB will be BSL any more come 2026.)

Yep, I saw it; edited my other comments to say it's there. Nice one!
Not ideal, but doesn't seem entirely terrible either
Not terrible but I think it should have a clause that if they stop supporting it (go out of business) it drops to apache or something. Their call of course; not for anyone else to say.

We would use it like this but would need to sign a contract somewhere that if support stops, it would, at least for us, drop away that requirement, maybe for a final lumpsum.

Edit; never mind, they already have such a clause! Nice one.