Open Source Isn't Dead...It's Just Forked

Introduction

Open source software has always been a delicate balance of ideals and practicality, and in 2024, this balance was upended. With an increasing trend of relicensing projects and a corresponding surge in forks, the open source community faces questions about what it means to be truly open. Following the heated discussions around the HashiCorp licensing controversy we covered in Open Source is Dead, we dive into the latest developments in this fascinating space. Dr. Dawn Foster’s latest research, The New Dynamics of Open Source: Relicensing, Forks, & Community Impact (Foster, 2024), helps us to understand into the realities of relicensing and the ripple effects it creates across communities and ecosystems.

The Origins of Open Source and Its Foundational Ideals

To understand the present, we need to revisit the origins of open source software. Born from the ideals of free software in the 1980s, movements like GNU and licenses like the GPL prioritized user freedom—to use, study, modify, and share software. Over the decades, these principles laid the groundwork for iconic projects like Linux, MySQL, and Kubernetes, turning open source into the backbone of modern computing.

However, as open source became mainstream, it also became commercialized. Companies built lucrative businesses on open source foundations, and this growing reliance on permissive licenses paved the way for hyperscalers like AWS to profit massively from the work of independent developers and smaller firms. The tension between free software ideals and commercial realities has only grown sharper, leading us to the current landscape.

What’s Really Happening?

Relicensing isn’t new, but 2024 made it clear that it’s becoming a dominant trend. Companies like Elastic, Redis Labs, and HashiCorp have shifted to restrictive licenses like SSPL or BSL, citing the need to protect their business models. The community’s response? Forks that reject these restrictions and champion a more inclusive governance model under neutral organizations like the Linux Foundation.

Each case exemplifies how relicensing has fractured trust, spurred action, and reshaped governance.

Elasticsearch and OpenSearch: A Case of Corporate Clash

Elastic’s decision to adopt the SSPL in 2021 was a pivotal moment in the open source landscape (Elastic, 2024). The move aimed to curb AWS from profiting off Elasticsearch without contributing back, but it alienated a significant portion of the community. AWS’s response—creating OpenSearch—wasn’t just about preserving functionality. While OpenSearch has since moved under the OpenSearch Foundation within the Linux Foundation as of September 2024, in its early days, AWS retained full control over the project’s direction, despite public claims of openness. Governance discussions were met with internal decision-making within Amazon, leading to frustration and disengagement from some community members (OpenSearch Foundation, 2024).

Redis and Valkey: A Fork Motivated by Relicensing

Redis Labs’ addition of the Commons Clause to its permissive BSD license in 2018 marked a turning point for the project. Over time, further shifts—including the adoption of SSPL—prompted frustration (Redis Labs, 2024). While KeyDB emerged as a multi-threaded performance fork of Redis, it was not directly motivated by relicensing and remains under corporate ownership without documented neutral governance (Snap Inc, 2024). The more direct response to relicensing was Valkey, an alternative fork created under the Linux Foundation with a neutral governance model, preserving the ethos of the original Redis project.

Terraform and OpenTofu: The Grassroots Rebellion

HashiCorp’s switch to the BSL in 2024 sparked outrage among users who had relied on Terraform’s openness (HashiCorp, 2024). OpenTofu, a fork led by the Linux Foundation, quickly rallied a coalition of contributors and organizations determined to uphold the principles of open collaboration. By emphasizing transparent governance and prioritizing user needs, OpenTofu has begun charting a course distinct from its progenitor (OpenTofu, 2024).

Forks as Revolutionaries

Foster’s research underscores the transformative potential of forks when they emerge under neutral governance. OpenSearch’s transition to the OpenSearch Software Foundation exemplifies how a fork can attract diverse contributors, ensuring long-term sustainability. Neutral foundations—free from single-vendor dominance—provide fertile ground for forks to grow into legitimate successors.

Valkey’s creation under the Linux Foundation highlights another example of how neutral governance fosters community resilience. Unlike KeyDB, which remains corporate-controlled, Valkey prioritizes open governance and contributor inclusivity.

Metrics That Matter: Expanding Beyond Organizational Diversity

Foster’s initial analysis emphasized organizational diversity as a key metric in evaluating project health. However, ongoing research aims to develop a more comprehensive set of metrics to assess forks and relicensed projects (CHAOSS Fork Case Study, 2024). The study is actively gathering data on additional health indicators beyond contributor diversity, with a focus on codebase divergence, governance structures, and long-term sustainability. Contributors welcome!

Codebase divergence, another critical metric, reveals how forks evolve independently. While maintaining initial compatibility, successful forks like OpenSearch and Valkey quickly pivot toward innovation driven by community needs.

Challenges Ahead

But let’s not romanticise forks. Fragmentation can be a nightmare for users, who often face compatibility issues and uncertainty about long-term support. Foster’s research calls for clearer communication between projects and their communities to mitigate these challenges.

At the heart of the debate lies a fundamental question: How can open source balance the competing demands of community ideals and commercial viability? Foster’s findings offer no easy answers but highlight the importance of transparency and shared governance as guiding principles.

Conclusion

Relicensing has forced the open source world to confront its identity crisis. Are we building digital commons, or are we just subsidizing corporate profit? The answer lies in how we interpret and address the motivations behind relicensing and the community’s response to it. On one hand, companies argue that relicensing is a pragmatic necessity—a way to protect their investments and ensure sustainability in a competitive environment dominated by hyperscalers. On the other hand, critics see it as a breach of trust, where corporate priorities overshadow the ethos of open collaboration.

Foster’s research goes beyond diagnosing this tension. It highlights actionable pathways for navigating these stormy waters. The emergence of community-driven forks and neutral governance models offers a compelling vision for the future. Forks like OpenSearch, Valkey, and OpenTofu showcase the resilience of open source communities when they rally around principles of transparency and inclusivity. These projects demonstrate that it is possible to break away from corporate control and rebuild ecosystems that prioritize collective ownership and innovation.

The truth remains that this is not a guaranteed outcome. The transition from relicensed projects to forks introduces challenges: fragmented ecosystems, compatibility issues, and the risk of diluted community efforts. Foster’s roadmap emphasizes the need for open dialogue, where both corporate entities and communities engage in shared decision-making. Neutral governance structures, like those provided by the Linux Foundation, play a pivotal role in ensuring that forks remain inclusive and sustainable.

Ultimately, the future of open source hinges on the willingness of its stewards to learn from these lessons. Whether relicensing leads to deeper fragmentation or a stronger, more inclusive digital commons depends on the choices made today.

Open source isn’t dead—it’s just forked. Whether that fork leads to greater inclusivity or deeper fragmentation depends on the choices we make today.

References

• Foster, D. (2024). "The New Dynamics of Open Source: Relicensing, Forks, & Community Impact." arXiv:2411.04739
• Elastic (2024). "Why We Chose SSPL." FAQ on Licensing
• OpenSearch Foundation (2024). "OpenSearch Software Foundation Launch Announcement." Launch Announcement
• HashiCorp (2024). "Terraform Licensing Change." Licensing FAQ
• OpenTofu (2024). opentofu.org
• Redis Labs (2024). redislabs.com