Hacker News Reader

Comment by plam503711 | Hacker News Reader

No, you don't get it: it's NOT Open Source. Because currently, there is NO way to build it from the sources.

Putting the sources on GitHub is something, but only with a very complicated build process which is not documented or even using URL's that are private/internal to Citrix.

That's why people start to push Citrix to at least release a documentation on the build process and/or exploring the difficulty to build it. See https://xen-orchestra.com/forum/topic/562/xenserver-7-3-and-... and also the Citrix thread regarding that: https://discussions.citrix.com/topic/391868-xenserver-73-ann...

So far, no answer from Citrix.

View on HN

So the rule is never to reply to a throwaway account. But what a load of entitled crap is this?!!

There is a way to do it, you just don't want to figure it out. You want to FORCE them to figure it out for you. BooHoo.

Again, this is a commercial product, that they open sourced. Their commitment was to release the source. They then additionally went thru the step of providing free services ( free binaries, open support system, etc ). This has not worked out for them, they also need to run as a business. They are still giving you ALL of the source.

RedHat went thru a similar period, and in all honesty, was the only thing that saved them as a company.

If a Centos projects comes out of this, awesome. if XCP ( Xen Cloud Platform ) comes back as a volunteer project, awesome too!

"Opensource" is about many things. But to me, and many others, one of the early core tenements has been that the users of a product help out in some way. It doesn't mean you get to whine your way into others doing free work for you.

The GPL anticipated this sort of thing which is why it required not just the source code to be released but all the build scripts and ancillary documentation required to actually use the source code. If they didn't incorporate anyone else's GPL code then they aren't in breach but its still a bait and switch.

It's using massively GPLv2 code from everywhere (plus XAPI and Xen are Linux foundation projects!).

GPL compliance requires you to provide build scripts.

We just need one of the copyright holders to force the issue then.

I wouldn't go this way, personally (David vs Goliath). At least, not after exploring almost all other options.

Hey listen, I'm living selling an Open Source product. So I know a bit how it works and what business means.

There is a gap between not posting a doc and having no way to build it because it uses internal Citrix URL to the dependencies. I'll will try to figure it out by myself, but I suppose you have no idea regarding the huge task it is.

This is not a normal situation: you can't brag you are open source but avoid people to build it themselves (that's what happening actually). You need to be clear about that. I have no problem if they remove the sources, at least the message is clear. But telling it's Open Source without providing something you can actually build IS the problem.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com