CNCF 告知 NATS 主要贡献者 Synadia,允许其自由地进行分支。
CNCF tells main NATS contributor Synadia that it's free to fork off

原始链接: https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/28/cncf_synadia_nats_dispute/

CNCF与NATS消息系统的主要贡献者Synadia就该项目的控制权发生争议。Synadia以在CNCF中缺乏蓬勃发展以及自身的大量投资为由,将未来NATS服务器版本从Apache 2.0许可证转移到商业源代码许可证(BSL),并要求完全控制NATS.io域名和GitHub代码库。CNCF则认为Synadia不能单方面声称拥有社区资产,并援引其章程中关于商标所有权的规定,已提交请愿书,以阻止Synadia继续使用NATS标识和域名。 Synadia创始人Derek Collison辩称,BSL确保了代码透明度,最终将恢复到Apache 2.0许可证,同时维护开源版本并允许商业化运作。他声称CNCF模式不适合NATS,因此他们的退出是一种主动措施。CNCF则认为Synadia的行为意图将一个社区项目私有化。这场争议引发了人们对NATS未来以及开源项目贡献和许可证正确处理方式的担忧。

这篇 Hacker News 的帖子讨论了 CNCF 与消息系统 NATS 之间的情况。原帖批评 CNCF 将企业利益置于开源理想之上,认为 NATS 无法毕业以及随后的许可问题突显了这种冲突。作者惋惜 CNCF 会员资格迫使初创公司屈从于其政治。 一位评论者指出,CNCF 曾警告 NATS 主要贡献者 Synadia 缺乏维护者多样性,这是毕业的关键要求。他们声称 Synadia 拒绝多样化,然后利用缺乏外部贡献来为限制性许可辩护,此举被视为利用 CNCF 提出的问题。 另一位用户表达了失望之情,因为他们正是因为 NATS 是 CNCF 项目才选择了它,并提到了之前 RethinkDB 的糟糕经历。他们认为许可证变更是一种“撤回地毯”的行为,破坏了 NATS 的未来潜力,尽管它具有技术优势。他们还链接了一个关于此事的 CNCF 问题。
相关文章
  • (评论) 2024-01-04
  • (评论) 2025-04-16
  • (评论) 2024-08-17
  • (评论) 2025-04-26
  • (评论) 2025-04-25

  • 原文

    The Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) has filed a petition with the US Patent and Trademark Office to prevent Synadia from using the logo and domain for NATS, the open source messaging system.

    The move follows a decision by Synadia, the vendor behind most of the contributions to the server software, to change the licensing terms of the NATS server, moving it from Apache 2.0 to Business Source License (BSL) in future releases.

    At the same time, the company's lawyers wrote to the Linux Foundation [PDF], which runs CNCF, to end its relationship with CNCF and receive full control of the NATS.io domain and GitHub repository.

    "The NATS.io project has failed to thrive as a CNCF project, with essentially all growth of the project to date arising from Synadia's efforts and Synadia's expense," the letter said.

    Synadia's counsel also argued in the letter that the "law is well settled that ownership of a domain name does not establish trademark rights; rather, it is the content of an associated website that may create trademark rights," going on to claim that Synadia and predecessor Apcera "at all times" controlled the content of the website."

    In a blog post last week, CNCF said Synadia had a number of options in moving to a less permissive software license, but the company was not allowed to keep the logo and the domain for the open source project, noting its charter states "Any project that is added to the CNCF must have ownership of its trademark and logo assets transferred to the Linux Foundation."

    It went on to claim: "CNCF has offered multiple paths that would allow Synadia to pursue its goals while respecting open source principles and community governance," adding: "Synadia is free to walk away from contributing to the existing NATS project. They're also free to fork NATS and build a proprietary offering under a new name. What they can't do is unilaterally claw back a community project and its infrastructure, assets, and branding."

    CNCF said it has also filed petitions with the US Patent and Trademark Office to prevent Synadia from continuing to use the logo [PDF] or domain name [PDF].

    "The Linux Foundation and the CNCF have protected the licensing integrity of open source projects before," the CNCF said in its blog. "There are proper ways for companies to fork projects and take another direction based on business needs. For example, the vendor Grafana forked the CNCF Cortex project under the new name Mimir while the original Cortex project continues to be maintained by the community within CNCF. Synadia's actions here are markedly different. Rather than creating a fork of NATS under a new name, Synadia wants to unilaterally seize control of the project's community-owned assets.

    "Synadia is attempting to convert a successful open source project into a closed, commercial product – and take the NATS community's name, trust, and infrastructure with it. Imagine if Google tried to take back Kubernetes after all these years of it being a neutral open source and community-driven project."

    However, Derek Collison, creator of NATS.io and Synadia founder and CEO, replied that BSL would continue to offer code transparency while the server software would revert to the Apache 2.0 license after two to four years, a model similar to other mixed source software companies.

    He said: "NATS is primarily funded, supported, and maintained by Synadia. This does not align neatly with the CNCF's model. Over recent years, it has become apparent that the CNCF may no longer be the best strategic fit for NATS. Rather than face forced archival, Synadia proactively initiated internal discussions with CNCF about a joint announcement regarding a departure, ensuring NATS' continued health and development.

    "To sustain long-term company and project viability, we explored excluding some advanced features and enhancements from the NATS server and licensing them separately instead. Ultimately, we considered a more community-minded approach: to include them in the NATS server while exploring a BSL license model for future versions. While the BSL is not OSI-approved, it ensures source code remains transparent and publicly accessible, reverting to Apache 2.0 after a defined period (typically 2-4 years). An Apache 2.0 licensed server version will always remain available and supported."

    The Register has contacted Synadia for additional comment.

    Commenting on LinkedIn, William Morgan, CEO of Buoyant, creators of the service mesh Linkerd, said: "The announcement that Synadia wants to withdraw NATS from the CNCF feels like it is going to end in a messy legal fight. This is not your run-of-the-mill OSS relicensing story." ®

    联系我们 contact @ memedata.com