NOT Open Core!

[u90umbridge]

To Whom It May Concern,
Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model or https://www.techtarget.com/searchitoperations/definition/open-core-model-open-core-software

I am writing to express my serious concern regarding Pimcore’s representation as an “Open Core” platform.
I have come to expect transparency and openess in both code and community engagement from any project that identifies itself as “open core.” However, my eperience with Pimcore now has left me disappointed and frustrated. Despite the “open core” label, key features and functionalities appear to be restricted behind a non-open license, making it difficult for the community to fully benefit from what is advertised as open core.

This lack of clarity and openness undermines trust the Pimcore brand and is inconsistent with the principles of Open Core development. I urge you to reconsider your messaging and licensing practices, or at the very least, provide clear and honest information and not call it "Open Core" when it is all proprietary.

Sincerely,
I thought it was open core.

[kingjia90]

Despite the “open core” label, key features and functionalities appear to be restricted behind a non-open license

To me, it looks like as described in the wiki.
Is the issue revolving around the interpretation of what would be considered as a key feature?

[kingjia90]

ahh, i get it now, so the public Core should stay fully open source to be considered as open core, thank you for the clarification

[dpfaffenbauer]

There is no part of Pimcore which is free and open-source. And especially, the core part, not at all. You do not know what is Open Source?

where, in your post, did you say something about open source? you complained about open core?

[NiklasBr]

I think it is this part:

Despite the “open core” label, key features and functionalities appear to be restricted behind a non-open license

[dpfaffenbauer]

Got it, thats what open core means, the source is open, but not freely usable

[kingjia90]

Currently, the FOSS and feature-limited version is technically the 11.5, so the definition seems fit, but maybe the expectation was that 12 (and so on) would be having 2 different licenses, a little similar as before (GPL and PCL for Enterprise)