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

241–250 of 520 posts

Re: The race to replace Redis

#241

Post by mattmanser »

exe34 wrote: post #194
vasco wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you own the copyrights you had money to spend at some point. Other than that unless you are one of the contributors you are leeching, just different flavors of leeching.

Is buying the same as leaching now? Words really do get diluted to the point of meaningless...

Often, as that's what rentiers are. Generally bad for society. And have captured many regulatory processes and got tons of tax breaks for producing nothing.

One of the well known flaws of capitalism, in the 'bad, but everything else is worse' sense.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#242

Post by rmbyrro »

graycat wrote: post #208

Redis, Redis, again more about Redis .... From you people who know a lot about Redis, help me out here: For my Web site code (for my startup), I needed a key-value store. Soooo, it looks like I could use Redis for that. But instead, wrote a little code using two instances of a Microsoft .NET collection class . Simple code. Plenty fast. Welcome programming exercise using .NET classes. Cheap -- no ongoing charges and n…

You are presuming everyone has the same needs as you had when assessing Redis, which is a bit naive, if I may share my opinion.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#243

Post by verdverm »

sakjur wrote: post #231
verdverm wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see more of a shift to open core. Many large orgs just say no to viral licenses, and in choosing AGPL, you put blockers to adoption. Open core releases some of the project under permissive license, and keeps some private or under a permissions license. We are all still trying to figure out how we can have sustainable open source where people can be paid to work on it full time

If you’re happy with paying a few maintainers, a support staff, and some salespeople the cash flow necessary for being a successful endeavor is a whole lot different than if you’ve raised $350 million. Maybe the problem lies more with overreaching and trying to cash out?

For sure, there is a problem in startup culture that looks down upon lifestyle companies. Devtools and developer focused products often get caught up in this.

At the same time, founders take money to build their idea into something more than they could do with a small team. An big companies are risk averse, having a small staff or being susceptible to "hit by a bus" failure is often a deal breaker

Re: The race to replace Redis

#244

Post by palata »

lukaszwojtow wrote: post #206

All this outcry about license switch coming from "community" feels funny. After all, if there is the "community" then they can take the last open-source version and keep developing it themselves, right? But most "communities" are about "take, take, take", not "work, work, work". They often upset only because someone declared they aren't going to work for free any more.

If you only take, obviously there is no reason to complain. Now the problem is rather when contributors (those who "give", not those who "take") have to sign a CLA. Then the company who gets their copyright takes their work for free, to later use it in a non open-source project (assuming they changed the license, like Redis did).

I think it is valid to find this immoral. The solution is pretty simple though: do not contribute to open source projects that require you to sign a CLA.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#245

Post by mariusor »

radicalbyte wrote: post #233
simonebrunozzi wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that Redis has an agreement of sorts with Salvatore Sanfilippo / Antirez, the creator of Redis.

Amazon / Google / Microsoft made a massive mistake by not hiring Antirez, it's chump change for them to throw him $1-2M a year at him so he can work on Redis for them full time.

Has anyone asked Filippo if he still wants to work on Redis "for them" though? The fact that he stepped down suggests he doesn't.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#246

Post by akho »

IshKebab wrote: post #190
ayakang31415 wrote: post #124

There is an easy solution not just for this, but for other potential masses: Just go with MIT license and make money with support

You're vastly overestimating how much companies want to pay for support.

About as much as it's worth, but not enough to give your VCs their x100 profit.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#247

Post by palata »

rmbyrro wrote: post #232
c0l0 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not AGPL, but L GPL-3.0-only. Neither of these licenses is "hostile". And ftr, in my eyes, a project being created/initiated by ddevault is an asset, certainly not a liability.

You are correct. The issue is that any [X]GPL license has bad reputation in business environments. They see it as a big legal risk that will require constant legal supervision over the technical usage of GPL-licensed code.

And they should learn. LGPL is really not that hard to use. If more open source projects adopted it, then business environments would have to adapt.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#248

Post by exe34 »

vasco wrote: post #234
exe34 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is buying the same as leaching now? Words really do get diluted to the point of meaningless...

How does buying a copyright to a name, literally just being able to call it "Redis" equate to purchasing the code contributions that individual contributors make? They bought the rights to the name, not the project, the project was open-source until the license change and belongs to society as a whole.

The project still belongs to society as a whole! You can fork it too! You just can't profit off their future work.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#249

Post by konschubert »

rmbyrro wrote: post #227
tsimionescu wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They dont't want AWS royalties. They wanna be able to command higher margins. Since AWS has lower costs and prices, Redis can't compete with good margins. The royalties are just a way to increase AWS costs, so that they raise their prices and give Redis the ability to keep high prices and margins, while still remaining attractive to customers (which don't have a cheaper choice anymore).

They want to make money with the software they built.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#250

Post by fweimer »

cpach wrote: post #198
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.

NB: Docker Engine is open source. (Docker Desktop is not.)

Moby is open source. The licensing situation for Docker Engine is unclear.
Post reply on HN