The open source community really needs to stop with the "just fork it" mindset.
I think the implication is that some other interested org could very easily step in and assume the role that the Mattermost org was in, and everyone would very eagerly switch and leave Mattermost itself speaking to an empty room.
Most people want security fixes.
The open source community really needs to stop with the "just do everything i want for free" mindset.
I mean, open source does not mean you're entitled to free support, and free in free software is not about money. I think people depend too much on those projects and then act entitled.
Of course the open source bait and switch done by companies is a shitty behavior worth calling out, but the companies exist to earn money and at this point this can be expected.
I do think this development represents a bait and switch though.
Yes, that’s what we are doing here.
> but the companies exist to earn money and at this point this can be expected.
Expected != ethical. Also not a necessary, logical outcome.
What is legitimately expected is a pro version that has more corporate features. We’re not talking about $Xx/user/mo to enable SSO here, though.
Well I did it for Mattermost and for some other software as well. Sure, its some work, but it's not "a ton" of work and may not be "trivial" but it is also not "far" from trivial.
Do it like Linux maintainers maintain a ton of patched RPM's, deb's, etc. Just keep a patch in GIT. For every release of Mattermost you do a GIT clone, apply your patch and build it. Most of the time the patch will just apply cleanly. Sometimes you need to make a few adjustments, you make them and put them in GIT. There is no extensive release management or anything. You just build a patched version for every released version.
It's right mindset. Just not applicable to projects that are made majority by the company because none of the contributors will move so it's essentially trying to make new team from scratch.
Wanting to use Mattermost's binaries rather than building from source?
Re licensing see: https://isitreallyfoss.com/projects/mattermost/
Now couple that with the fact that supply-chain control is profitable (legally or illegally); I think the next 5-10 years will be interesting.
The source code is... AGPL licensed? But not the admin tools. They seem to be licensed under the Apache License 2.0.
--------
Yeah, good luck. Contact your lawyer.
You have to follow the AGPL "no additional restrictions" clause while also following the Apache License, and the Apache License might have require you to follow additional restrictions.
Why? The intent seems pretty clear and they're legally allowed to do this because all contributors signed a CLA.