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

351–360 of 520 posts

Re: The race to replace Redis

#351

Post by ryanjshaw »

tison wrote: post #7
tison wrote: post #5

For the first time, I know our (Apache Kvrocks, an alternative to Redis on Flash) committer Binbin Wang committed nearly 25% of the commits to the newer Redis version. You can find his contributor for both at: * https://github.com/apache/kvrocks/graphs/contributors * https://github.com/redis/redis/graphs/contributors

And here is an interesting conversation when Binbin came to the Kvrocks community: https://github.com/apache/kvrocks/pull/1581#issuecomment-163... * Me: @enjoy-binbin Out of curiosity, do you have a fuzzer to test out Kvrocks? Your recent great fixes seem like a combo rather than random findings :D * Binbin: They were actually random findings.I may be sensitive to this, doing code review and found them (also based on…

Why does the fix work like that - only checking for this one scenario when you decrement by type max? [1]

In Solidity, where it's a serious security risk, before the language performed overflow checks itself, library authors would perform the arithmetic operation and then e.g. check if the result is larger than the original value in the case of a positive subtrahend [2].

[1] https://github.com/apache/kvrocks/pull/1581/commits/dc5140dd...

[2] https://github.com/KingdomStudiosIO/contracts/blob/51873b574...

Re: The race to replace Redis

#352

Post by pritambarhate »

pjmlp wrote: post #329
stephenr wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You keep making comments about this, as if Redis was build from scratch by the company that is now making it closed source. They bought an open source project, and now that the original founder has stepped away they're trying to squeeze it for all they can. The "big corps" that you claim are using it to "pirate software in a legal way" (a) have been contributing to the formerly open source redis project, and (b) are…

Doesn't matter, they are the rigthfull owners of Redis and the author has freely given ownership to them, and has been paid for. Supermarket bills cannot be paid with pull requests.

> rigthfull owners of Redis and the author has freely given ownership to them

By using BSD license Antirez has freely given it to the whole world, not the name Redis but the code. No matter how big the corporations, the cloud providers are just using that code the way Antirez intended when he used the BSD license. You can't blame the cloud providers for that.

> Supermarket bills cannot be paid with pull requests.

But one can become famous by writing quality open source software and this fame can be used to get very high paying jobs.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#353

Post by ufocia »

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.

Your confusing copyrights with trademarks. The project belongs to the authors (perhaps in shares depending on the jurisdiction where it is being copied/derived) not the society. The options that were licensed under BSD generally remain licensed under BSD unless someone revoked that license. It does not seem that the latter has happened.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#354

Post by KptMarchewa »

stephenr wrote: post #283
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…

> that redis will remain free to use in their “community edition”, I mean, they've already changed licensing for parts of the project twice in 6 years. I have zero faith that they won't pull a Vader and change the terms of the agreement again. > continue to be supported and maintained (and improved!) I'd guess that > 99% of any "improvements" Redis the company make, will affect As has been pointed out numerous times,…

>As I've said before, the story of what's happened to Redis (and HashiCorp stuff) is likely to become a warning to the tech community in general: if an OSS project you rely on transfers control from it's founder(s) to a company, you probably need to consider continuing with a fork from the last open version, because apparently "(try to) monetise popular open source" is the newest way to win the douchebag villain award given to MBAs at VC funded companies.

Or, even simpler, if the project is not contributed to some open source foundation, and does not have copyleft license - it's a trap.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#355

Post by ufocia »

exe34 wrote: post #248
vasco wrote: post #234

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.

It does not belong to the society (whatever that's supposed to mean). It is not in the public domain as far as we know.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#356

Post by pizza234 »

aragilar wrote: post #95
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…

Define "fix". By definition you cannot have an open source licence which says "cannot be used for bezos yacht". Either you accept that, and don't rely on exclusivity for income (which really what the whole relicensing thing is about), or you don't open source your code (and accept that not being open source is a problem for some people). Open source + exclusivity for income is an unstable state, and really only works…

> Define "fix". By definition you cannot have an open source licence which says "cannot be used for bezos yacht"

FOSS acceptance is a grey area. Something has been tried with the AGPL, which is FOSS, however, it has been deemed not to provide adequate protection by companies creating similar products (while, ironically, being considered poisonous by companies using them), so the SSPL was created, but it hasn't been accepted as FOSS license because its intent was unclearly defined (http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.o...).

Re: The race to replace Redis

#357

Post by jakupovic »

mythz wrote: post #270
happymellon wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err, after this license change Redis Inc will be the biggest leechers considering they didn't contribute the majority of the code. > Yep still the biggest leachers Redis was literally licensed for people to do whatever they want. That's not leeching.

Redis Labs was a long time sponsor for the full-time development of Redis then later compensated the creator of Redis for their rights to Redis Technology and branding who was ended up retiring from technology to write Sci-Fi books. By contrast AWS takes most of the profits whilst contributing relatively nothing back, making them the biggest leacher and the primary motivation for the relicensing to prevent mega corps…

During an all-hands around 2008 I asked AWS leadership whether AWS was going to open source their technologies the answer was we're thinking about it. 16 years later it has not happened, nor it will given the record ;(

Re: The race to replace Redis

#358

Post by ufocia »

gkbrk wrote: post #226
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...

It is if the thing they bought had contributions from many other people but pretty much all of them got nothing for it.

We don't know what they got. Perhaps some of them were paid to create the contributions. And, in any case, that's OK. The contributors knew or should have known the impact of the license. They could've picked a more restrictive/free license, depending on your point of view. I guess they can still revoke the license. They have not given up their copyrights and the license is arguably not irrevocable.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#359

Post by ufocia »

mattmanser wrote: post #241
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...

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.

Not that capitalism is the perfect economic scheme, but rentiers exist in many economic regimes. Communism probably has more rentiers than capitalism, i.e. many people take more than they contribute.
Post reply on HN