←back to thread

The Deletion of Docker.io/Bitnami

(community.broadcom.com)
329 points zdkaster | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.201s | source
Show context
greatgib ◴[] No.45049298[source]
I don't want to discount the work they are doing, and that it has no value, but a little bit shocking that they expect to go all commercial with this, in the Oracle way, while just "packaging" and so relying on open source software that they will not contribute to.

Also, I'm a little bit wondering at how much all of this is really copyrightable in the end. Because if you keep it private I understand, but here it is basically for each package just a few lines, recipes to build the components that they don't own. Like trying to copyright the line "make build".

And it might be each the single and obvious way to package the thing anyway.

And speaking at the built artefacts, usually a binary distribution of third party open source software with common license should preserve the same rights to the user to access the source code, the instructions to build, and the right to redistribute...

replies(2): >>45049473 #>>45049478 #
nopurpose ◴[] No.45049473[source]
"Makefile" they have written and copyrighting is very non trivial and there are many man-months of effort. Configuring all sorts of software just with env vars and make it usable is not an easy feat.

Have a look at https://github.com/bitnami/containers/tree/main/bitnami/post... as example.

It might be worth a commercial license for some of their current user-base, no doubt.

replies(3): >>45049694 #>>45056383 #>>45056489 #
tomalbrc ◴[] No.45049694[source]
This has to be a joke, right? Months of effort for a makefile? In which world do people live these days
replies(6): >>45049733 #>>45049977 #>>45049987 #>>45051104 #>>45051310 #>>45056458 #
1. WesolyKubeczek ◴[] No.45049987[source]
Tell me you haven't ever written even a moderately complex Makefile without telling me you haven't ever written even a moderately complex Makefile.