Hashicorp did it the right way round. Open source, friendly, rug pull, profit, obsolete, forgotten.
One thing that I've been curious to see, and not sure if anyone has done it yet, is a quantification of contribution to Terraform, comparing amount of work done from external contributors to the work done by Hashicorp-internal contributors.
I know it's hard to make the comparison of what is "harder" work or "more" work in a software project from looking at commits alone, but would be interesting to see nonetheless.
tho a separate group of people who actually decide the finances of companies will not be in this same group. As old saying goes, "Nobody Gets Fired For Buying IBM".
Not entirely. If they were cleverer about this, the open source fork would not have been so viable. Perhaps they didn't consider people would fork?
OR have the core of your tool be open-source but add proprietary value on top of it so that the proprietary version is more attractive (like Tailscale with their Coordination Server). With Terraform, this could have been the cores that manage plans and state.
The issue here (purely unsubstantiated outsider opinion) is that Mitchell is a hacker that created things that were immensely valuable and punted the profit part of it for later. Hard to undo that, but it was good enough to raise millions on millions and create a super sweet company to work for (before they went public and were forced to wear a suit like the rest of The Street)
Yeah, so Tesla AFAIU isn't even GPL compliant as what they publish is not the complete corresponding source code for their Linux/buildroot based firmware.