Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client | Hacker News Reader

Show HN: HTTP Prompt – An interactive HTTP command-line client

http-prompt.com

56 pointseliangcs23 comments

From http://docs.http-prompt.com/en/latest/contributor-guide.html:

> Fork is a term invented by GitHub.

No, it is not.

Also, do I get royalties for my contributions to this open source project? Since you're literally selling other people a gated license to the code I contribute, I'm wondering how this works from a legal perspective.

> Fork is a term invented by GitHub.

Amazing, isn't it? With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it.

> With the internet, we have this wealth of knowledge at our fingertips and yet so few use it.

And yet, you still can't believe everything you read on the Internet.

You can at least fact check who invented the term fork.

Hi, author here. Thanks for the feedback! I'll fix that fork term mistake soon. That is a stupid mistake.

I just started this subscription recently as an experiment to see if I can make a sustainable open source project. I haven't made any money from it yet. And I haven't decided if and how we should give royalties with contributors. If I get lucky, the business model works, this topic is open for discussion among contributors.

Doing that without a Contributors License Agreement seems at the very least iffy. (AGPL + commercial isn't exactly unusual, but normally there is a CLA involved)

The (A)GPL does in no way preclude you–or anyone–from selling it. It does, however, require you to provide source code, at least upon request, to those that have received non-source code versions.

That said, the specific arrangement in this case may be a bit strange. There's a "commercial end-user license agreement", which I'm pretty sure is not possible–unless they are the author of all the code in question, in which case they can make up as many licenses as they want.

right, "AGPL+commercial" in my comment meant AGPL + a commercial license.

It isn't!? Next you're going to tell me that Atlassian didn't invent the term Spooning

I think I'd rather just donate to the httpie developer to extend it to achieve this functionality.

Would you rather do that because of the AGPL licensing? I ask because you don't have to donate or pay to use this tool unless you want to use the latest features earlier.

BSD license is a lot friendlier. If one is gaining experience with the codebase, it seems more useful to get experience with the BSD codebase, since one can then use that codebase in projects.

Open source on github with a paid subscription. Is this something new?

Gratis != open-source != free (free is about liberty, not price)

Any combination of these 3 principles is possible with the right license

Instead of always commenting to resolve the ambiguity around the 'Free' in FOSS I feel we should instead use a different term. Say 'Modifiable'/'Liberal' Open Source Software ?

'Libre' may be the term you're looking for

Is that even an English word?

"Libre /ˈliːbrə/ is a loan word in English[citation needed], borrowed from French and Spanish, used to describe something as being "free", in the sense of "having freedom" or "liberty". It is used in English to distinguish the two meanings of free: free as in freedom (libre) from free as in free of charge (gratis). Another sample is common: Free as "Free Speech", not as "Free Drink"!" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_(word)

But then the acronym will be 'LOSS' ..... enterprise managers would think twice before considering it ;).

Open Source Software (OSS) is not the same as Free Software (FS). And even with Free Software, the free doesn't mean necessarily Gratis. There is something called Free Open Source Software (FOSS), but even there the Free doesn't need to mean Gratis. Either way, I don't think there is something wrong with having a paid service, while still having your code being OSS. It means that you can access the code, and use the product for free, but you might want to pay for the services the company might offer on top of it. Not that I know if that's the case here, but you know, it's possible.

It's not new. One example I look up to is Sidekiq (http://sidekiq.org). It offers a paid subscription for its pro version.

Right, but sidekiq's pro version isn't in a github repo. They host a private repo for you when you fork over the cash and discontinue it after a year.

HTTP Prompt paid version isn't on GitHub either. It's hosted on a private server only available for paid users.

Interesting. Reminds me of rest shell from a few years back. https://github.com/spring-projects/rest-shell

Reply on news.ycombinator.com