Ayende @ Rahien

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Sat, 22 May 2010 16:25:47 GMT

Leonid, OEM license is annual server is either monthly or one time

Leonid Shirmanov commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Sat, 22 May 2010 15:05:50 GMT

Ayende - Yes, I see... and both licenses are the annual subscriptions?

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Sat, 22 May 2010 14:11:27 GMT

Leonid, OEM applies if you are running this in embedded mode. For example, if you want to run Raven on your Windows application. In your scenario, it would appear that you need two licenses: a) server license for the server part b) OEM license for the client application

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Sat, 22 May 2010 14:11:21 GMT

Leonid Shirmanov commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Sat, 22 May 2010 13:00:18 GMT

I didn't quite understand the OEM licensing scheme. Could you please draft out any sample for a boxed product uses RavenDB. For instance, the application that has a server side that's supposed to be installed to customer's server and includes RavenDB server as part of it, and UI application used by users and accesses that server using RavenDB client. How many licenses should I get for that scenario? Is there any difference if the client application is either desktop or web?

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Fri, 21 May 2010 09:13:21 GMT

Anders, It is up there now.

Anders commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Fri, 21 May 2010 08:48:47 GMT

Maybe it's just me but I cannot find anything about pricing on the Raven db site??? What do I have to pay to use it commercially?

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Fri, 21 May 2010 07:55:09 GMT

Parag, The pricing has changed

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Fri, 21 May 2010 07:54:48 GMT

Jason, RavenDB is OSS, it also comes with a commercial license. This is a _very_ common model in the OSS world. From MySQL to ExtJS, as two prominent examples

Parag commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Fri, 21 May 2010 06:35:57 GMT

Ayende honestly RavenDB looks good but the pricing implies that it is only for the *BIG* guys and not small ISVs like us. There should be Developer versions don't you think ? Priced right, something like VistaDB pricing ?

Jason Short commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Fri, 21 May 2010 03:51:43 GMT

I honestly wonder why the free part of the license at all other than to try to generate publicity. If you want to make it commercial than do so, but don't slap the Open Source label on it and then dual license, etc. I have no problem with commercial software. I have no problem with open source software. I have a problem with commercial software that pretends to be open source to generate publicity and then really can't be used in anything. Don't sit on the fence. Do one thing or the other.

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Thu, 20 May 2010 15:45:58 GMT

Andy, Good point.

Andy commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Thu, 20 May 2010 08:51:46 GMT

I would stop using the word "perpetual" as it can be a bit fuzzy what that means for non-native English people. Better to use one time fee.... or something similar... I think the word "perpetual" have caused a lot of confusion.....

Stefan Wenig commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Thu, 20 May 2010 08:47:04 GMT

as for the derived work debate: [www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation)

Richard Lopes commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Thu, 20 May 2010 08:41:50 GMT

I guess you can say that you just shoot yourself in the foot with that "licensing" stuff. I really don't see ANY reasons for using RavenDB over an existing NoSQL solution. You need to be more humble and realistic here. Do some market research. Time will maybe tell if you are right or not, but that's my opinion.

alberto commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Thu, 20 May 2010 01:22:44 GMT

I have no interest in Raven atm (or any other NoSQL DB, in fact), but just wanted to mention, as some others already did, that you cannot consider derived work a client that uses a reversed engineered protocol. If someone creates such a client and releases under a different license, you'll have to live with that. I mention this not to criticize you for choosing this model, but to prevent you from unexpected results that may piss you off. I wish your business the best, you deserve it.

NC commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 23:52:27 GMT

Eric mentioned your post about MongoDBHQ Pricing structure and how you didn't understand it. I'm saying I don't understand what relevance it is to your licensing because it's licensing two completely different things. You're licensing a product, they are licensing hosting. MongoDB itself is 100% free. Their page is pretty clear so I'm not sure at what point you found it confusing or didn't understand it.

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 22:31:11 GMT

NC, I fail to your point.

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 21:17:12 GMT

Eric, Not quite. What I said is that if your users can't figure out how they are going to get charged until they check the bill, they are going to feel ripped off. Paying for expensive software is not ripping off. Thanks for your comments regarding the pricing table.

Eric commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 20:54:45 GMT

Ummm didn't you just post an article about how laying out a pricing tier like this makes you feel like you are getting ripped off? and then you go ahead and do it yourself, except worse? I believe the article was in mention of Mongo HQ? BTW as for your pricing screen, you are doing it wrong. You do not mention support until you talk to the client as it should be custom tailored to their needs. You can get more money this way, and you also don't scare of potential clients. Additionally, you should have a fixed price listed. The free should not be part of the table as the table is depicting a pricing structure, free should be some print above or below the table explaining the fact that its free to OSS. Additionally with a table that long, you might want to condense to only the differences and have another page that explains the features...You might want to read Just my two cents!

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 19:42:09 GMT

Stephen, I am interested to hear why you think the site is minimal at best.

Stephen commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 19:36:07 GMT

@firefly, I don't think people expecting it to be free is that unsurprising, sure you spent a lot of time working on this, but you went into it knowing there are databases that are much more proven, and are somewhat more original, and very cheap in comparison. I've no idea if this will be profitable for you considering the time you spent/spend on it, but when you check the site, which is very minimal at best, and consider the product is just an alternative to others that have been around for a LOT longer, and are essentially 'free', have tons of documentation and developers using them, are already somewhat well ironed out, you'd have to be pretty crazy to pick raven instead.

josh commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 19:30:11 GMT

I thought it seemed a little high at first, but after reading some of the list discussion I'm coming around a little. It still seems like an express or embedded-only edition would be a good entry level price point. Just my 2 cents; didn't want to start a whole thread on the ravendb group just for that.

Alex commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 16:50:26 GMT

I had high hopes for RavenDB, ready to use it full time, and now this...the pricing just blew me out of the water. Considering my project expenses are coming out-of-pocket, there is no way to even come close to the prices I saw. Of course, I went back later and saw that the prices now say TBD. But, I imagine they won't change drastically from what was there before. Either way, I can't justify the price when there are free, already established alternatives. I guess it's back to MongoDB for me.

firefly commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 15:36:40 GMT

Perhaps the pricing is a little stiff (Nevermind that I think it's TBA now) but I don't get why some people are having problem with the AGPL while Raven is dual license??? I personally couldn't think of a better license than the AGPL for software such as Raven. Even the AGPL might not be restrictive enough IMHO. Some people just expect others to work for free... :)

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 14:38:39 GMT

Karthik, > Pricing for regional .NET User Group A link saying that "Powered By RavenDB" would be sufficient.

Onur Gumus commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 14:35:35 GMT

Everything you said is correct.Except the client. One can reverse engineer the protocol and use it as he likes. And it is NOT a derived work. Any lawyer will tell you that. There are many applications of this like SAMBA, the open source nvidia driver. Although license concept for these examples are different your AGPL does not secure client implementation as well.

Karthik commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 14:09:18 GMT

You probably need to clarify the startup pricing a bit. Most startups are cautious against betting their business on a backend technology that is still experimenting with their pricing. Also what would pricing look like for a non-profit (like a regional .NET User Group) that wants to build a website on RavenDB?

Travis commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 14:07:22 GMT

Sounds fun to tinker with, but until someone provides < $10 month Raven hosting, let me sleep.

Ayende Rahien commented on Comments on RavenDB licensing

Wed, 19 May 2010 13:46:40 GMT

Karloff, Yes.