I don’t know why you think I am bitter. I see value in open source software, including all of the rights given in the Opens Source Definition. I prefer open source, and require it for many uses. I promote the use of open source, and I have promoted the use of sentry in the past- based in part on the fact that it was open source- and I find it sad that I can no longer recommend it on that basis.

You asked how it impacts me- it impacts me by making it impossible to fork the project if Sentry decides to take it in a direction or fails to support it in an appropriate manner in the future. The BSL only allows a 3 year old version of the software to be forked. This places the community at a disadvantage, and sets sentry as a project dictator that does not have to be benevolent or risk a fork.

Whereas in an open source project, if the maintainers stop being benevolent, the community can fork it- this has happened with several projects in the past- in some cases the split became permanent, resulting in both communities being healthy, in other cases one community ends up thriving, and in other cases, the two sides reconcile their differences. S

With the BSL, the new community would always be at a disadvantage, as no one in the new community could use the product to operate a managed solution.

You mentioned AWS stealing from sentry- I was unaware they had ever doen any such thing- that would obviously be illegal- and should be prosecuted if they attempted to do such a thing!

Yes, I encourage companies to exploit open source, I am perfectly okay with it. I highly encourage the use of open source to make money!

Edit: Just wanted to clarify again, I am not bitter or angry about this- Sentry (appear to be trying to be) honest and is within their rights. I am just saddened by this development, and I wish they could have found an alternative that would protect the open source status of their code.