> Mistral Code Enterprise is a fork of Continue. All due credit to the original creators of Continue.
Source: https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=mistrala...
Link destination: https://www.continue.dev/
Source: https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=mistrala...
Link destination: https://www.continue.dev/
For years, ollama didn't acknowledge llama.cpp and r/localllama found it weird until they finally mentioned llama.cpp on their page, but the damage is done: most apps that support local LLMs only support ollama or LM Studio API, not the original llama.cpp.
i'm a bald head grey beard, at least in the 90's when we shared software it was for the reasons we outlined, there was no github stars, there was no trying to line a job. it was a true gift and pay it forward sort of thing to the world. it's been almost lost due to money, if you need to earn a living, start a business, get a job and make your open source project a hobby. don't mix them together.
With all due respect, that's not how most open source software is today [1]. A lot of CS students on the job market need Github stars or green tiles in case the employers check their page. So many open source projects are done only to boost resumes, not for the reasons you mentioned. Not to mention a lot of projects start as open source to lure users, only to become closed at some point (the notorious langchain is one example).
[1]: with the exception of some huge projects like ffmpeg, llama.cpp, etc.
Then I would submit that you are picking the wrong license. The whole point of the GPL/AGPL family of licenses is to ensure that they can't just do this. They will be required to publish their changes, which benefits the original project (you). It's not a perfect solution, but it helps a great deal. The answer to this problem is not to close up and/or go proprietary.
https://www.tldrlegal.com/license/mozilla-public-license-2-0...
If you are using a copyleft license, especially AGPL, you may not get paid either, but you may get valuable contributions in return. It is also a good way to avoid having big companies profit from your work, if that's what you want.
If you want to make money but still want to open source, use a non-free "source available" licence (ex: "non-commercial"). They tend to be unpopular in the open source community and it is probably not the best way to get known.
And then you can have dual-licences, like GPL + commercial. Qt is probably the most popular software using that scheme.
But I don't really understand the people who publish software under a permissive licences and get forked by some tech giant and complain. That's what permissive licenses are for!
That being said, I highly value having access to the source code, even under a restrictive license. The source code is the best documentation, it doesn't lie. Also being able to make small changes, recompile with different libraries, etc... but for me, the "documentation" aspect is the most important. I don't do security, but I guess being able to audit the code is a good thing too.
For me, open source goes beyond the "freedom" aspect. Also, AFAIK, most commercial game engines are "source available" too.
Other nice thing about BSL is it converts to an Open Source license after 3-4 years which addresses the concern “what if the software vendor goes out of business”. You can support it yourself or another vendor can pick it up and support it after that time period.
They want to have their cake and eat it.
The code would be, but I'm not sure that's much of a barrier.
- If your primary goal is to release open software that stays open, then release under a copyleft license (GPL)
- If your primary goal is to release software for no-strings-attached use (including incorporation into commercial services) then use a permissive license (MIT, BSD, etc.)
Enterprise deals are usually around compliance and security primarily. Companies want centralized billing and to be sure that their developers only use "sanctioned" AI and other tech.
Who knows though with that contact us sales wall.
I do have access to US models via Kagi to play around with and use for things Mistral doesn't work on. I've been meaning to try command a too, but haven't gotten around to it. I will say that the new mistral medium model is surprisingly good, though I've only just started using it. Codestral is definitely behind other models.
I wouldnt use an AI LLM that has 50% of chance of me needing to reprompt or try another model, I prefer using direclty the best model directly. But yeah US vs. Europe is a real concern
Strikes me as a weird combo to have a fork of a VS Code/JetBrains extension be a completely walled off enterprise only deal. Any other apps out there having success with this sort of model?