Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dvfjsdhgfv 801 days ago
> But the real problem I have with, "I hope the lesson will be learned" is that the lesson people are learning is "don't try to build ambitious software requiring a lot of work from a dedicated core team using an open source license; you're going to find yourself damned if you do and damned if you don't".

Yeah, for things running server-side that could be used by Amazon and Microsoft, they should use SSPL from the start. In this case everything is clear and everybody knows what to expect. For regular users, there is absolutely zero difference between SSPL and OSI-certified licenses.
1 comments
sanderjd 801 days ago
Yes, they definitely should use something like that from the start, in my view. But I think they won't, because there is now a lot of evidence that this will result in a bunch of bad press, whereas just making it proprietary will go without comment.

What incentive do companies have to do this?

link
pas 799 days ago
the best strategy is still to start out with something that's press-positive (Apache2) and switch to BSL/SSPL after funding is secured. bad press will happen, but at least later, after the good press phase.
link
sanderjd 799 days ago
What is the advantage of that, over just building proprietary software?
link