Airbyte has previous of advertising their offering as open source while not really being as per the OSD[2]. This has been raised with them previously but without response [3][4]. They've also been extending their use of ELv2, recently moving many of their existing MIT licensed connectors to be ELv2 [5].
I don't personally take issue with the choice of license here, I respect the right to protect your work and choose a license that works for you, I'm just against the misuse of open source wording.
[1] https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/blob/master/LICENSE [2] https://opensource.org/osd/ [3] https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/issues/9246 [4] https://github.com/airbytehq/airbyte/issues/17118 [5] https://airbyte.com/blog/update-on-airbytes-license
The USPTO denied a trademark and service mark for "open-source" to the OSI when they applied: "So “open-source” is not and cannot become a trademark"
> https://opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.p...
Why should a 10-point list of "Debian's Free Software Guidelines" for the union of public domain software + FSF style Free Software define the opposite of "closed-source"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Free_Software_Guideline...
Why should a "Marketing Campaign for for Free Software" dictate what is the opposite of "closed-source" software?
https://web.archive.org/web/19991013094510/http://opensource...
Why doesn't the OSI focus on it's own trademark: "OSI Approved License(tm)", a trademark that it actually owns; rather than forever trying to harass, bully and shame independent that share all of their code but otherwise eschew "free software" and "public domain software"?
I agree with your stance, especially off the back of CodeCov/Sentry in the last few days marketing a non-OSD license as Open Source
I don't know what it is, some people bring up the crazy valuation, but it just strikes me that a for such a targeted use case their execution game was great initially, but by now when discussing integration tools they are receiving quite some critique with regards to speed, stability and configurability.
It sure seems to me their OSS offering has not received much love while their cloud product is not close to peer functionality (missing custom connectors being a huuuuge one as of two months ago). All the connectors in the world ain't worth much if the core platform to run them on isn't stable, slow or doesn't support all of a company's data sources, inevitably containing long tail ones not covered by the core team?
Am I being overly negative here?
I'd love to hear what others think.
One more feature that I think is really interesting is the Connector Builder, which is a no code solution that works for many different API use cases. We at Airbyte hope that this makes it easier for folks to build out the custom connectors they might need.
