In a surprising turn of events, Elastic has decided to embrace open source once more. If you recall, about three years ago, Elasticsearch made headlines by changing its licensing model. The reason? A conflict with AWS that led to a significant shift in the open-source community. Frustrated by Elastic’s decision, the community forked the last truly open-source version of Elasticsearch and birthed a new project called OpenSearch.
Fast forward to today, OpenSearch has not only survived but thrived. With a roadmap that's increasingly divergent from Elasticsearch and a community that's fiercely supportive, OpenSearch has carved out its own identity, adding numerous features and innovations that distinguish it from its predecessor. This success story is a testament to the power of community-driven development.
Now, Elastic has announced a return to its open-source roots, introducing two new licenses in a bid to regain the trust of the community. But the question remains: Is it too late? For over three years, developers, enterprises, and enthusiasts have been investing their time and resources into OpenSearch. Elastic's pivot back to open source may be seen as an attempt to reclaim lost ground, but whether they can successfully bring the community back remains to be seen.
This scenario should serve as a cautionary tale for others in the tech world—particularly for HashiCorp, the creators of Terraform. Recently, HashiCorp’s decision to shift its licensing has sparked controversy, leading to the emergence of OpenTofu, a community-driven fork of Terraform. Just as OpenSearch grew and thrived after the Elasticsearch fork, OpenTofu has the potential to do the same.
The lesson here is clear: When a project decides to move away from its open-source foundations, it risks alienating its most dedicated users and contributors. The community doesn’t wait around; it adapts, forks, and moves forward. If Terraform maintains its current course, the future may hold a similar story to that of Elasticsearch—where the fork, OpenTofu, evolves with its own unique features and gains the trust of the open-source community.
In the ever-evolving landscape of software development, the true strength lies in the hands of the community. Companies that underestimate this might find themselves playing catch-up, trying to win back the very people they once took for granted.
So, what does this mean for developers and companies today? It’s a reminder that open-source software is more than just code—it’s about trust, collaboration, and shared goals. And when that trust is broken, the community will find a way to keep moving forward, with or without the original creators.
For further insights or any questions, connect with me on:
Top comments (2)
Growing a tech company with open source only is probably very hard.
Some startups I follow introduced a commercial license for companies over a given year revenue.. Also Serverless.com did it as well.
Personally I prefer how the SQLite team works: fully open source forever, they get payed to develop new features the big players need, or to speedup certain milestones.
I understand is not always feasible, and fighting with big giants that can make a commerical product on top of your open source one is probably frustrating.
Too little, too late. A very strange move on their part.