On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 7:06 AM Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> wrote:
> El dimarts, 14 de setembre de 2021, a les 20:35:40 (CEST), Ben Cooksley va > escriure: > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 5:35 AM Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> wrote: > > > > > El dimarts, 14 de setembre de 2021, a les 17:23:01 (CEST), Harald > Sitter > > > va escriure: > > > > It is practically free software as far as we are concerned > > > > > > I guess this means it's not actually Free Software? > > > > > > > Please see https://open.sentry.io/licensing/ > > > > The tl;dr is that the license it is provided under (BSL 1.1) is not OSI > > approved due to the restriction on it's use by cloud vendors (ie. it has > an > > anti-AWS clause). > > That restriction lapses after 36 months, at which point it is Apache 2.0 > > compatible. > > > > Based on what Harald has written earlier, it looks like Sentry is the > only > > suitable game in town for what we need - the only question is whether we > > are happy to make use of BSL 1.1 licensed software given that we have > > traditionally only deployed 100% open source software to our systems > (which > > is why we use Gitlab CE over Gitlab EE) > > Oh i feel we already discussed this in the past, right? > > Sorry for bringing it up again then :) > I've checked my mail archives and there was a public discussion regarding Sentry/BSL earlier yes - however it didn't reach a conclusion, it was deferred to a BoF. That was for server/infrastructure event monitoring as well, rather than crash handling. > Cheers, > Albert > Cheers, Ben > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Albert > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > Ben > > > > > > >
