Intel Takes Open-Source Hyperscan Development To Proprietary Licensed Software

[brad0]

That's only true if there's only a single copyright holder and in GPL projects there are often multiple so even if the original developer wants to make the project proprietary they only have the copyright to his or her own code and not to any of the contributions and that's why it's almost impossible to make GPL projects proprietary, especially if they are popular with a lot of contributors. That's not in the least bit true of BSD projects. Anyone can make a proprietary fork whenever they wish including the original developer.

It's far from being almost impossible to make GPL projects proprietary. You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

[qarium]

there is a simple solution to this problem: just don't buy intel hardware.

[WileEPyote]

Alright buddy

It's hard to reason with programmed individuals like you.

Keep bending over for the big guys
You clearly like it

This comment makes no sense. How are they helping Intel? It's not like they're going out to buy the locked down hyperscan.

[Kjell]

This comment makes no sense. How are they helping Intel? It's not like they're going out to buy the locked down hyperscan.

Sentiment.

Yes, Intel has every right to do whatever they please with their intellectual property. We have no say in their decision making, like re-licensing or if it's made private. They own it.

However, what we can control is the sentiment. Don't defend a multi-billion dollar company.

[moltonel]

This thing must be hella performant if they are switching it to a closed source paid library. I can't imagine there's a shortage of regex libraries out there, so it must have a niche it fills.

It generally has very good run-time, and very bad compile-time. It's an amazing engine for a handful of niche cases, but would be a poor choice as a default engine. As always, it depends on the regex, corpus, matching method, and hardware.

Still, I can't imagine they'll sell many licenses.

[Flaburgan]

Comments here are focusing on economics reasons to why they are making it closed source. But when I readtm the description of the lib in Michael post:

>It is suitable for usage scenarios such as deep packet inspection (DPI)

I have my own idea why they don't want us to read the code anymore...

[Volta]

Lol. Tell us you have no idea how software licenses work without actually telling us. It is their software. It could have been written using any license under the sun, including GPL, and they would still be allowed to relicense it to _whatever_ they want. Any BSD licensed version is still BSD licensed and available for forking as has already been done.

You're making fool of yourself, because you're missing the entire point (but you're not alone ). Now Intel can take any patch it wants from the fork. What a genius [shit] BSD license.

[Volta]

It's far from being almost impossible to make GPL projects proprietary. You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

It doesn't matter. You can always fork such project and proprietary entity can only look at your patches. If it's BSD they can take everything they want, so you and your contributors are working for them.

[LtdJorge]

Lol. Tell us you have no idea how software licenses work without actually telling us. It is their software. It could have been written using any license under the sun, including GPL, and they would still be allowed to relicense it to _whatever_ they want. Any BSD licensed version is still BSD licensed and available for forking as has already been done.

Volta is a known troll

[LtdJorge]

There's always https://crates.io/crates/regex-automata (also just the regex crate, which is a bit higher level, but r-a is more in line with hyperscan I guess). And https://crates.io/crates/aho-corasick too, which regex-automata uses when "perf" feature is enabled.