Live data from Hacker News

Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

techcrunch.com

21–30 of 140 posts

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#21
post #20

> the community now understands that the original concept of open source has to be fixed because it isn’t suitable anymore to the modern era where cloud companies use their monopoly power to adopt any successful open source project without contributing anything to it. Assuming "community" means general open source devs/users, this doesn't speak for everyone. The (admittedly small) stuff I make open source is given to…

> I don't feel "taken advantage of" when my code is taken, used in secret, and nothing is given back. I'm glad I could help. If you make a new technology and an entity bigger than you comes along and makes profit, gives you no credit and contributes nothing in return, you are not going to be "glad to help", you're going to want something in return. These companies do not contribute so they're required to adopt the ne…

> you are not going to be "glad to help", you're going to want something in return

That's not true and the very point of my comment. To each his own, but no need to assume it of others.

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#22
Dammit TechCrunch... neither this nor the previous license were/are "open source".

My comment from another thread:

>As an outspoken critic of the original change, I applaud this move. I still wish it were open source, but this solves a lot of the confusing nomenclature I took offense with. Kudos.

That being said, this is some serious bullshit:

>But after the initial noise calmed down — and especially after some other companies came out with a similar concept — the community now understands that the original concept of open source has to be fixed

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#23
post #20

> the community now understands that the original concept of open source has to be fixed because it isn’t suitable anymore to the modern era where cloud companies use their monopoly power to adopt any successful open source project without contributing anything to it. Assuming "community" means general open source devs/users, this doesn't speak for everyone. The (admittedly small) stuff I make open source is given to…

> I don't feel "taken advantage of" when my code is taken, used in secret, and nothing is given back. I'm glad I could help. If you make a new technology and an entity bigger than you comes along and makes profit, gives you no credit and contributes nothing in return, you are not going to be "glad to help", you're going to want something in return. These companies do not contribute so they're required to adopt the ne…

> You use that NPM package? They have a donate button? You should be required to donate if you're a giant like Amazon/Microsoft/Google etc.

a license with these terms wouldn't conform to any definition of open source or free software. if you want that, go for it, but if you've licensed something with any libre license you are already consenting to allow anyone use your software for profit as long as they meet the license terms. you may or may not agree with this state of affairs, but adding these types of restrictions/requirements also means that you aren't doing open source or free software anymore.

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#24

Dammit TechCrunch... neither this nor the previous license were/are "open source". My comment from another thread: >As an outspoken critic of the original change, I applaud this move. I still wish it were open source, but this solves a lot of the confusing nomenclature I took offense with. Kudos. That being said, this is some serious bullshit: >But after the initial noise calmed down — and especially after some other…

[deleted]

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#25
post #11

"The community now understands that the original concept of open source has to be fixed." The open source issue is fixed, it is called AGPL. However, the issue that Redis along many other suffering from is called brutal competition, it is not even just tech or open source tech, Amazon is eating everyone's lunch. I don't have any idea how this problem can be solved. But, I know that restricting building API compatible…

If Redis had some big product people used, and their Redis server was just a middleware component, it could be a great side business where they sell support, but not the primary business. All the other big players like Google/Facebook will open source those middle pieces to help people who will make apps that will most likely have to interact with their platforms. They'll never release the source to actual end produc…

RedHat is (was?) sortof an example, but their product wasn't the open source software per-se, it was the guarantees their consulting and support offers.

RedHat makes, for example, patches for kernel vulnerabilities, but they actually give that away for free. What they sell is a promise that when there's a new vulnerability, you can get a patch from them quickly.

They also spread this service across MANY different open source packages. Like you said, a company that just offered services around a smaller package would have to run a lot more lean and would probably be a risky venture.

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#26
post #5

"The community now understands that the original concept of open source has to be fixed." Well, how lucky for the community that a wise startup came along and fixed open source. I get that open source business models are hard, especially in an increasingly commoditized space like databases. Still, it rubs me the wrong way when a business wants the goodwill of open source, then tries its hardest to bend the rules in i…

Why does one have to make money with open source? Why does that have to be a goal in and of itself. Are people going to take your stuff and not contribute back? Possibly .. that's why there's the FSF/Stallman and GPLv3 argument. Out of curiosity would the GPLv3 at least force providers like Amazon to release any modifications they make to FOSS stuff to turn it into a hosted/managed service? With things like Apache/BS…

[deleted]

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#27
post #5

"The community now understands that the original concept of open source has to be fixed." Well, how lucky for the community that a wise startup came along and fixed open source. I get that open source business models are hard, especially in an increasingly commoditized space like databases. Still, it rubs me the wrong way when a business wants the goodwill of open source, then tries its hardest to bend the rules in i…

You mean like Sugar CRM?

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#28
post #5

"The community now understands that the original concept of open source has to be fixed." Well, how lucky for the community that a wise startup came along and fixed open source. I get that open source business models are hard, especially in an increasingly commoditized space like databases. Still, it rubs me the wrong way when a business wants the goodwill of open source, then tries its hardest to bend the rules in i…

Why does one have to make money with open source? Why does that have to be a goal in and of itself. Are people going to take your stuff and not contribute back? Possibly .. that's why there's the FSF/Stallman and GPLv3 argument. Out of curiosity would the GPLv3 at least force providers like Amazon to release any modifications they make to FOSS stuff to turn it into a hosted/managed service? With things like Apache/BS…

GPLv3 prevents TiVo, AGPL prevents AWS.

Puppet has an Apache licensed community edition, and they make money just fine. RedHat, Canonical, and so on.

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#29
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Redis had some big product people used, and their Redis server was just a middleware component, it could be a great side business where they sell support, but not the primary business. All the other big players like Google/Facebook will open source those middle pieces to help people who will make apps that will most likely have to interact with their platforms. They'll never release the source to actual end produc…

Even with closed source software, Amazon will eat your lunch, even if you're Microsoft: AWS WorkMail is Exchange compatible. It is a hard problem.

> even if you're Microsoft: AWS WorkMail is Exchange compatible

That may be the case, but WorkMail is definitely not eating MSFT's lunch. Microsoft continues to be incredibly successful in enterprise

Re: Redis Labs Changes Its Open-Source License Again

#30
post #5

"The community now understands that the original concept of open source has to be fixed." Well, how lucky for the community that a wise startup came along and fixed open source. I get that open source business models are hard, especially in an increasingly commoditized space like databases. Still, it rubs me the wrong way when a business wants the goodwill of open source, then tries its hardest to bend the rules in i…

Rubs me the wrong way when a cloud computing company repackages open source code and starts making huge money without contributing.

Rubs me the wrong way when these same companies can just re implement the API and cause massive hurt to an open source competitor.

Post reply on HN