> It doesn't matter what they say, read the license.
I would love to but the terms within the ElasticSearch codebase on Github are quite confusing. Here's the text of the LICENCE.TXT file.
Source code in this repository is covered by one of three licenses: (i) the
Apache License 2.0 (ii) an Apache License 2.0 compatible license (iii) the
Elastic License. The default license throughout the repository is Apache License
2.0 unless the header specifies another license. Elastic Licensed code is found
only in the x-pack directory.
The build produces two sets of binaries - one set that falls under the Elastic
License and another set that falls under Apache License 2.0. The binaries that
contain `-oss` in the artifact name are licensed under Apache License 2.0 and
these binaries do not package any code from the x-pack directory.
Aside from not showing copies of the applicable licenses, it seems you have to read the code headers to determine which source file has which license. There are a lot of ways to respond to competitive threats from Amazon, but this approach is increasingly chaotic the closer you look.
I would love to but the terms within the ElasticSearch codebase on Github are quite confusing. Here's the text of the LICENCE.TXT file.
Aside from not showing copies of the applicable licenses, it seems you have to read the code headers to determine which source file has which license. There are a lot of ways to respond to competitive threats from Amazon, but this approach is increasingly chaotic the closer you look.[1] https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/master/LICENSE...