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

From where I left

antirez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 472 posts

Re: From where I left

#291

Post by mise_en_place »

simonw wrote: post #68

For me, the license change upset me mainly for two reasons: 1. Many people had contributed their efforts to the Redis project for free - both in terms of code but also in advocacy, writing tutorials, publishing example code etc - and when they did that it was under the understanding that project would remain under the same open source license. It honestly felt like a betrayal of trust. 2. From a purely selfish point…

The license change is a necessary evil, otherwise BigCo will continue EEE and extract value from the project without giving anything back. It's time to hit them where it hurts. The world will be a better place if Google collapsed tomorrow. FOSS must adapt to SaaS and the modern rent-seeking behaviors of BigCos.

Re: From where I left

#292

Post by Cpoll »

jerrygenser wrote: post #282
mmaunder wrote: post #265

I’m amazed Antirez didn’t fork Redis and start fresh like Monty did MySQL. AWS, Azure and GC would be thrilled to support his work on an OSS fork. After 9 years surely any contractual constraints have expired? Maybe a sense of moral obligation? Or perhaps Redis Inc recruited him to prevent exactly this? Either way we all very much appreciate the work you have done. Redis has been a game changer for many of us running…

He has stock options in redis labs, so existing financial ties - although he mentions in his blog his comp for coming isn't wild, I wonder what the option package looks like

> He has stock options in redis labs, so existing financial ties

I was thinking "just divest," but they're not public yet, so you're right that it's a possibility.

Re: From where I left

#293

Post by enugu »

BizarroLand wrote: post #238
sangnoir wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Open source is a gift economy. Receiving a gift does not form a social contract that entitles you to future gifts I think op was talking about contributors, who essentially gifted back. One might take offense if they were exchanging gifts with someone, and they open a pop-up store and sell what was gifted. Also, it's also a tiny bit hypocritical to expect revenue sharing with Amazon without doing the same for contr…

They're also stealing the name of the community. I feel like once a software is open sourced the name of that software should also be required to remain open sourced as well, and any closing of the source must come with a requirement of forking the software and changing the name. It's honestly pretty horrible that a group of people can take centuries of man hours away from the community and tell the community to kick…

It is absurd to call this license change stealing when the previous work is still available under the original license. This is more like someone who is giving to the community, still continuing to give, but with a slightly more strict license. Do you expect someone who is doing philantropic work, gets contributions from others, but later becomes less philantropic to change their name?

> NEVER NEVER NEVER have had the traction

There is plenty of even closed source software which has traction in many domains, let alone software released under a license which as anti-rez points out allows the users to freely run their websites on redis, modify and redistribute code etc.(with the exception of running hosting services like Amazon).

For instance, it would be amazing and a great improvement if there was a top-quality CAD program with a similar license to Redis.

Re: From where I left

#294

Post by nothrabannosir »

crote wrote: post #134
antirez wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Many people had contributed their efforts to the Redis project for free - both in terms of code but also in advocacy, writing tutorials, publishing example code etc" I can understand that, but the thing about the BSD license is that such value never gets lost. People are able to fork, and after a fork for the original project to still lead will be require to put something more on the table. Inside Redis it was tried…

With open-source software, a license is as much a social contract as it is a legal one. People contribute because they want to be part of a community building something which is beneficial to everyone . Everyone contributes where they can, and in turn takes what they need. Redis Ltd. broke the social contract. They decided that the short-term profitability of the company was more important than the project as a whole…

> With open-source software, a license is as much a social contract as it is a legal one

Says who? I completely disagree. A license only applies to the current work done. It does not compel someone to keep dedicating time to a project for free because they also did that in the past. People are allowed to change, even if they once released some code under a different license.

Is the old code still available under the same license ? That’s the only contract I care about , both legal and social.

I am just as much a member of this FLOSS community as others , and I never got the memo about this social contract story. I don’t think it’s true. My trust hasn’t been affected at all.

I understand your point I just get annoyed being lumped into it. Not everyone feels that way.

(But of course my opinion does matter less than actual contributors to Redis ! That’s totally fair.)

Re: From where I left

#295

Post by jchw »

stephenr wrote: post #268
jcgrillo wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Redis, Inc. could some day be acquired by Oracle This is truly the nightmare scenario, and it'll be interesting to see how it plays out when such a thing happens. Not saying specifically with these two companies, but so far these licenses aren't particularly tested, and it seems we just can't really know what will actually happen without running the experiment.

TBH oracle have been better stewards of MySQL since they bought Sun than Redis the company has been of Redis for the last five or so years.

I personally have wondered if Oracle's behavior with MySQL is partly motivated by the fact that if they try to rug-pull it will most likely just push all of the cloud providers over to MariaDB anyways, which has been doing just fine, and I think is already supported by Amazon RDS anyways. Ultimately I am totally fine with a fork-heavy ecosystem, the only thing I would erase if I could is the normalization of signing CLAs, as I think they make the normally-symmetrical prospect of contributing to open source projects highly asymmetrical, and the consequences are not always so obvious to people.

Re: From where I left

#296

Post by uncomplexity_ »

langsoul-com wrote: post #252

Why say Claude is ahead of the rest? (I don't keep up to date, only using mainstream tools in ides) Right now I use Amazon Q to buy integrate into phpstorm and its ok. It's free so a major advantage. Is it just terms of using their chat models?

Think of it as "taste".

People have different tastes, artists and chefs have different tastes.

Claude and ChatGPT are crafted by different people hence you'll only see these nuances once you experience it first-hand, and you might not even be able to articulate it very well, you'll just find yourself gravitated towards one thing over another.

I suggest you try both.

Re: From where I left

#299

Post by gus_massa »

strbean wrote: post #251
snoman wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile, it’s wild to me that you seem to think open source means “free for everyone… except them - they make too much money.”

That's not even remotely what I'm saying. I'm saying if a company modifies open source software and distributes it, they should be required to distribute the modified source as well. I'm further claiming that providing a hosted service is a form of distribution. > “free for everyone… except them - they make too much money.” Free for everyone, and if you make changes to improve it, and let others use the software you…

> That's the basic principle of OSS, no?

No, only for GPL. If the project has a BSD or MIT licence you may distribute the compiled version and keep the changes secret.

Re: From where I left

#300

Post by bruce511 »

crote wrote: post #134
antirez wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Many people had contributed their efforts to the Redis project for free - both in terms of code but also in advocacy, writing tutorials, publishing example code etc" I can understand that, but the thing about the BSD license is that such value never gets lost. People are able to fork, and after a fork for the original project to still lead will be require to put something more on the table. Inside Redis it was tried…

With open-source software, a license is as much a social contract as it is a legal one. People contribute because they want to be part of a community building something which is beneficial to everyone . Everyone contributes where they can, and in turn takes what they need. Redis Ltd. broke the social contract. They decided that the short-term profitability of the company was more important than the project as a whole…

I read this as you saying...

You gave us a bunch of stuff for free. You are now putting some conditions on that for new stuff you do. And that makes me sad.

I get the "feelings" part of this. When the world changes, even for the better, it can make us sad.

Equally this license better supports the stuff I am getting for free, and penalizes some giant corporation with buckets of money. And I keep getting stuff for free. So (frankly) I'm happy.

So meh. Is trust broken? Is the community harmed? Should we expect more moves along these lines? Do I see all decisions as clearly black and white - good or evil? Or is there more nuance?

For those upset at AWS no longer getting Redis for free, you can of course fork it and carry on developing for AWS. Those who don't like new redis can carry on running the old one. Those who want new redis can, well, download and use it.

Frankly they didn't hurt my feelings. They're developing. I still get it. I'm happy, not sad.

Post reply on HN