The appeal of open source software has always been its promise of freedom — freedom to use, modify, and distribute code without the restrictions of proprietary licenses. But in a new world where commercial entities increasingly impose restrictive licenses or shift toward more closed models, the rise of open source forks has and will continue to be a staple for the open source community going forward. These forks, often born from a need to preserve the principles of open source, are reshaping the software ecosystem and allowing the developer community to stick to building solutions for their companies or businesses using only open source tooling. With that said, what does it truly mean to embrace open source and more specifically these forked versions of licensed solutions? What should users expect with these forked open source solutions? What are the short-term/long-term implications of switching to the forked solution?
First, let's talk about real-world open source forks; the history of open source is filled with examples of forks that emerged in response to licensing changes, perceived limitations in original projects, or simply because we didn't want to put our faith in the larger entity that owns the product.
One of the most famous examples is MariaDB, a fork of MySQL. When Oracle acquired MySQL back in 2009, concerns arose about the future of the database under a corporate umbrella and while MySQL has remained open source, the idea of it living under Oracle's roof was enough to push some of the original creators to fork an alternative that still lived within the developer community. During the early stages of MariaDB, it was used as a drop-in replacement that promised to remain open and community-driven. Being able to simply switch from MySQL to MariaDB with minimal effort made adopting their product easy. Fast forward to today, MariaDB is widely adopted and continues to evolve independently from its ancestor. With the community driving the success, MariaDB has been adopted as the default database in major Linux distributions, including Debian, RHEL, CentOS, openSUSE, and Fedora.
Another prominent example is LibreOffice, which was forked from OpenOffice after Oracle's acquisition of Sun Microsystems. Fearing that the stewardship of OpenOffice might suffer under Oracle, the community forked the project to create LibreOffice, which has since become the more popular and actively developed office suite.
OpenTofu, (forked from Hashicorp Terraform), is a newer example along with OpenBao (forked from Hashicorp Vault). When HashiCorp changed the license for Terraform and Vault to the Business Source License (BSL), the community quickly responded by forking the project under the name OpenTofu & OpenBao. These forks aim to preserve the tool’s open nature and ensure that the developer community has a truly open source alternative to some of the industries widely adapted softwares.
What to Expect When Using Open Source Forks
When considering a switch to an open source fork, it’s crucial to understand the potential differences and challenges:
Feature Parity vs. Divergence: In the early stages, many forks strive for feature parity with the original project. However, as time goes on, forks may diverge, introducing new features, optimizations, or even removing legacy functionality. This divergence can be both a strength and a challenge, as it offers innovation but may require users to adapt. Staying connected to the forks change log or roadmap will be important to monitor as the project develops.
Community Support and Documentation: One of the primary concerns with using a fork is the level of community support. While original projects often have established ecosystems, forks may take time to build similar resources. Users should assess the health of the community, the availability of documentation, and the level of active development before committing.
Integration and Compatibility: Depending on how far a fork has diverged, there may be challenges in integrating it with other tools or systems. For example, plugins, libraries, or integrations that work with the original project might not be fully compatible with the fork. Users need to be prepared for potential hurdles in this area and also consider contributing an open source plugin whenever possible.
Maintenance and Longevity: Open source projects thrive on community participation. A fork’s future depends on the dedication of its maintainers and contributors. Unlike commercial software, which has dedicated teams behind it, forks rely on volunteers or smaller organizations. The sustainability of these projects hinges on active involvement and financial support from the community.
Driving Adoption: The Key to Keeping Open Source Forks Alive! The success of any open source fork depends on one critical factor: adoption. Without widespread use and contribution, even the most promising fork risks fading into obscurity. The open source community must take proactive steps to drive adoption of these forks to ensure they thrive.
Advocacy and Awareness: The first step in driving adoption is spreading awareness. Community leaders, developers, and advocates should actively promote forks that align with open source principles. This means blogging about them, discussing them in forums, and presenting them at conferences.
Contributing to Development: Beyond using the software, contributing to its development is crucial. Whether it’s writing code, reporting bugs, or improving documentation, every contribution counts. The more active a community, the more likely a fork is to succeed.
Supporting Through Sponsorship and Donations: Financial support is often a limiting factor for open source projects. Sponsoring developers or donating to projects can make a significant difference in their sustainability. Many forks now offer donation options, and platforms like GitHub Sponsors make it easier to support open source maintainers.
Incorporating Forks into Business and Education: Businesses and educational institutions play a vital role in open source adoption. By incorporating open source forks into their workflows, organizations not only benefit from the software but also signal to the broader community that these projects are viable alternatives. When businesses standardize on forks like OpenTofu, OpenBao, or MariaDB, they help ensure their continued development and maintenance.
The Future of Open Source Forks
The future of open source forks is inherently tied to the broader open source movement. As more companies attempt to monetize open source software through restrictive licensing, the importance of forks will only grow. These projects represent a way to preserve the freedoms that open source was founded on—freedoms that allow innovation, collaboration, and accessibility.
However, for forks to truly succeed, the community must rally around them. Embracing open source forks isn’t just about choosing a different piece of software; it’s about making a commitment to the values of openness and collaboration. It’s about ensuring that the software we rely on remains in the hands of the people who use it, rather than being locked away behind corporate paywalls.
In the end, the success of open source forks will depend on us—developers, businesses, and users. By driving adoption, contributing to development, and supporting these projects financially, we can ensure that the spirit of open source continues to thrive. The journey from license to freedom is not always easy, but it is a path worth taking.
If you would like to give some of these open source forks a try, please visit the Linode Marketplace for a One-Click production ready installation.
OpenBao - https://www.linode.com/docs/marketplace-docs/guides/openbao/
MariaDB - https://www.linode.com/docs/marketplace-docs/guides/mysql/
Top comments (0)