291–300 of 520 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Garnet is MIT licensed. See: https://github.com/microsoft/garnet
And requires a CLA, see the same link
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 c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, battle-tested Elasticsearch is a ticking time bomb for not wanting to get their lunch eaten by Jeff Bezos. Just use this pre-V1 public beta software I stumbled upon instead.
The reality is that open search will be (if it is not already) more widely deployed and “battle tested” with bugs that production use raise resolved in it. The narrative that opensearch is some kind of unsafe abandonware is clearly nonsense when you read the commit log: https://github.com/opensearch-project/OpenSearch/commits/mai... All I can say is, sure, if you want elastic use elastic. …but opensearch is fine. I u…
"It lacks so many improvements and advancements since the ancient version it was forked at"
to "opensearch is some kind of unsafe abandonware"?
Would love to learn the thought process here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People need to make money somehow. Developers who spend years creating, maintaining, and continually improving an open source database (or other project) used by millions deserve compensation. This doesn't apply as much to Redis Labs since they swooped in much later, but the general principle of trying to monetize your project with source-available licenses doesn't feel unethical to me. You're right that it's probabl…
> Developers who spend years creating, maintaining, and continually improving an open source database (or other project) used by millions deserve compensation. Redis Labs can start by compensating its external contributors (Tencent, Amazon, Alibaba among them) if they care about fairness this much.
Microsoft's Garnet has the best chance of replacing Redis, the OSS project and the hosting company. Article doesn't mention it, but supposedly Microsoft uses novel algorithms and multi threading to achieve an order of magnitude improvement in throughput. Now if they can commercialize it with Azure, it should be a credible alternative to Redis Enterprise hosting.
Probably not, because it's new and incompatible with many Redis use cases (lua scripts, etc).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case the community is the biggest contributor to Redis. The ones that "take, take, take" is Redis the company. Your comment seems way out of place in this light.
Good. So now Redis Inc is in trouble because they have to replace community work with their own. If community does most of the work, then what's the problem?
I don’t typically ask people to RTFA because that’s against the rules, but you would have known all of the above if you bothered to read the article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The future is never guaranteed. Much less if you have no paid contract with the people building and maintaining the floor underneath your feet.
AWS, GCP have assurance that they won't need to pay for their Linux infrastructure. What is it if it wasn't for copyleft licenses(GPL)?
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.
Redis is great as an off-the shelf component, but it's not exactly rocket science to re-implement for a big corporation. So redis doesn't really have any leverage in my opinion.