[robbintt]

It will affect categories of business users (programmers) who currently embrace terraform: amazon, google, microsoft, oracle, alibaba cloud.

Like it or not, cohorts of engineering organizations like the above (cloud providers) have a very outsized weight and already have contender products they can choose to vigorously fund tomorrow.

From the article:

The license does not allow you to use Terraform if you meet both of the following conditions: You are building a product that is competitive with HashiCorp. You embed or host Terraform in your product.

My $0.02: the management of hashicorp is following a stupid trend and should have thought about their customers more.

It will come out to what lawyers think, I guess. Lawyers usually say no to things with poorly established precedent.

[cbo100]

> have contender products they can choose to vigorously fund tomorrow.

Then why didn’t they “choose” to fund hashicorp yesterday and avoid this?

As usual in OSS-goes-private events these all just sound like “keep building our critical infrastructure tool for free or we will go elsewhere”.

What is hashicorp or any other company in their position to do?

This is not sustainable.

[i_am_jl]

> As usual in OSS-goes-private events these all just sound like “keep building our critical infrastructure tool for free or we will go elsewhere”.

If Terraform was 100% developed by HashiCorp employees that would be fair description. It's more like "We're the only company allowed to make money off of the codebase you contributed to."

> What is hashicorp or any other company in their position to do?

I'd suggest paying developers to write proprietary code. That way they could just sell a product they fully own instead of having to pull this bullshit re-licensing of an open source codebase.