Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> These systems are not small tasks to keep up and running.. the
> upstream code is not 'static' or backportable so you are constantly
> updating to upstream to keep up with CVE security. There are also
> regular schema changes and a ton of packaging items which need someone
> who is going to become a discourse expert to run. Our experience has
> been that we either end up having a system which is broken a lot
> because it isn't being maintained or is taking up so much time that
> Fedora people complain we aren't working on getting a compose out the
> door.
>
> So instead we decided to invest money into a company which pays the
> authors of discourse (and we previously paid the person who wrote
> askbot). That means we do lose absolute control but we do fund the
> upstream.
Yet, this means that we are experiencing exactly the kind of lock-in that we
claim to free us and our users from.
Having to pay extra for some features (as the hosted version of Discourse
does it) is lock-in. (Interestingly, unlike, e.g., Gitlab, Discourse
apparently does not follow this same crippleware strategy for the self-
hosted version, they state that all features are provided as Free (Libre)
Software and at no cost (if you self-host the application). Only the hosted
version of Discourse does market segmentation.)
Having no way to migrate the data when switching to a different platform is
lock-in, too.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
