Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The race to replace Redis

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 520 posts

Re: The race to replace Redis

#81

Post by wmf »

itake wrote: post #44
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #38

Engineers have to eat too. Nothing wrong with charging for support. I love passion projects as much as anyone, but there is a reason they are hobbies, and people need to keep a day job. Eventually it does get tiring to do support for free. Edit: Ok. I was talking OSS generally. I guess Redis is being bad actor if they are taking OSS work and running away with it to get the money, and not compensating the contributors…

My issue is the OSS contributors that were not paid for their work, but their work will be monetized now.

That's been going on for 30 years with proprietary BSD forks. That's what they signed up for.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#82

Post by dralley »

jacooper wrote: post #32
west0n wrote: post #24

Neal Gompa opened a discussion on the Fedora development list, noting the license change and the need to remove Redis from Fedora. Gompa also raised the issue on openSUSE's Factory discussion list. After Docker was phased out, various distributions have adopted the compatible Podman as a replacement for Docker. It seems that a similar story is unfolding with Redis.

Docker was only phased out in red hat distros because they don't like it and want to push Podman. Others still have docker packaged in their repos.

A bit reductionist. IIRC the main reason Docker was phased out because Red Hat wanted to push rootless, daemonless containers, which required CGroups v2, which Docker didn't want to support for the longest time. Since both versions of CGroups can't be enabled simultaneously, and no distro wanted to go without Docker (or at least Docker-like) functionality, CGroups v2 was left in permanent stasis, and so Red Hat started Podman to break the deadlock. There were a laundry list of other technical disagreements (mostly around security) but that was the primary one.

And then once Red Hat distros switched over to CGroups v2, which Podman enabled them to do, it meant that Docker wouldn't really work all that well anymore until they eventually switched to CGroups v2 also (which they eventually did a few years later). So that's why it got removed from the repos, at least originally.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#84

Post by akoboldfrying »

llm_trw wrote: post #80
klabb3 wrote: post #70

Why don’t we try to fix the “cannot be used for bezos yacht”-licenses instead of shunning the numerous companies of especially databases who want to do good in a meaningful way? Source available is good, better than proprietary which is what we get with aws, but still not enough. People are legitimately afraid of rug pulls, like sneaking in essential features into paid offerings. I think a lot of the skepticism comes…

The best idea I've come up with is a license which only grants the rights to a natural person to use the software otherwise it is identical to the MIT, GPL or AGPL, whatever your cup of tea is. If you're a corporation then you need to buy a license.

This could be an interesting idea, but how would this constrain incorporating the licensed software in a larger piece of software? Either as a library, or a component like a Docker image?

Would it be "viral" in the sense that, if I want to publish software that internally uses a Docker container running software with such a license, my own software can be used only by natural persons?

Re: The race to replace Redis

#85

Post by tick_tock_tick »

klabb3 wrote: post #70

Why don’t we try to fix the “cannot be used for bezos yacht”-licenses instead of shunning the numerous companies of especially databases who want to do good in a meaningful way? Source available is good, better than proprietary which is what we get with aws, but still not enough. People are legitimately afraid of rug pulls, like sneaking in essential features into paid offerings. I think a lot of the skepticism comes…

I think you'll find that the vast vast majority of us don't care about the whole "cannot be used for bezos yacht" problem when we contribute to free software.

I contribute with no expectation of monitory gain and absolutely zero desire for some random foundation or company that's part or almost always created later to make any money. If some contributors want to make money become consultants the "amazon problem" isn't a real one.

I love when Amazon or Google or whoever starts working with a project I'm touching it means it will normally get high quality contributions.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#86

Post by coredog64 »

brody_hamer wrote: post #48

It wasn’t clear to me until I read their blog, that redis will remain free to use in their “community edition”, which will continue to be supported and maintained (and improved!) So we as developers don’t have to scramble to replace redis in our SAAS apps and web based software. This is more about preventing AWS from eating their lunch by providing redis-as-a-service, without paying any sort of compensation to the re…

> without paying any sort of compensation to the redis developers.

AWS employee Madelyn Olson was a committer on Redis since 2019. Since 2020, she was on the core team of maintainers.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#87

Post by tsimionescu »

nerdponx wrote: post #41

Isn't this the reason why AGPL has started to get more popular? Everyone has to play by the very strict rules except the copyright holder, who can do whatever they want, but the community still benefits from the core software being open source. The BSD license in particular seems like a particularly bad way to run a business.

The whole move to new "open-core" licenses started with the most famous (infamous?) AGPL project - MongoDB. The AGPL is not what companies like this want (Mongo, Elastic, Redis etc). They don't want AWS's code: AWS is already providing that. They want AWS to pay them royalties or stop competing.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#88

Post by Temporary_31337 »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #85
klabb3 wrote: post #70

Why don’t we try to fix the “cannot be used for bezos yacht”-licenses instead of shunning the numerous companies of especially databases who want to do good in a meaningful way? Source available is good, better than proprietary which is what we get with aws, but still not enough. People are legitimately afraid of rug pulls, like sneaking in essential features into paid offerings. I think a lot of the skepticism comes…

I think you'll find that the vast vast majority of us don't care about the whole "cannot be used for bezos yacht" problem when we contribute to free software. I contribute with no expectation of monitory gain and absolutely zero desire for some random foundation or company that's part or almost always created later to make any money. If some contributors want to make money become consultants the "amazon problem" isn'…

How do you make money?

Re: The race to replace Redis

#89

Post by tick_tock_tick »

jacooper wrote: post #32
west0n wrote: post #24

Neal Gompa opened a discussion on the Fedora development list, noting the license change and the need to remove Redis from Fedora. Gompa also raised the issue on openSUSE's Factory discussion list. After Docker was phased out, various distributions have adopted the compatible Podman as a replacement for Docker. It seems that a similar story is unfolding with Redis.

Docker was only phased out in red hat distros because they don't like it and want to push Podman. Others still have docker packaged in their repos.

It's not in Debian and their wiki straight up directs you to podman with a nice big scary warning about dockers root issue.

https://wiki.debian.org/Docker

Docker is dyeing on linux podman will be the only one that remains.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#90

Post by jumploops »

klabb3 wrote: post #70

Why don’t we try to fix the “cannot be used for bezos yacht”-licenses instead of shunning the numerous companies of especially databases who want to do good in a meaningful way? Source available is good, better than proprietary which is what we get with aws, but still not enough. People are legitimately afraid of rug pulls, like sneaking in essential features into paid offerings. I think a lot of the skepticism comes…

I believe this is the goal of https://faircode.io ?
Post reply on HN