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

Redis is open source again

antirez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 815 posts

Re: Redis is open source again

#491

Post by Alupis »

fastball wrote: post #453
gkbrk wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I update my packages and suddenly an open-source software is replaced with a closed-source one, I would blame my distro. It's totally normal for distros to replace packages like this with the best replacement they have.

I think that is not normal at all, and absolutely should not be normalized. It is much worse for my package manager to install a totally different software, than for my package manager to install a new version of the software I asked for that now has a different license. Also as an aside, SSPL is not closed-source. If the distro wants to do something, they can throw a warning up saying "this package is now licensed w…

You're a bit late to the party. Its been normalized for almost as long as distros have existed.

No, you don't just randomly have a different package installed one day, at least on major distros. The next distro release will include the new package. If for any reason you care, you can always go install the other one you want instead as well, it just won't be part of the default package repos.

Generally, the replacement packages are 1:1 with the one they are replacing, and/or compatibility shims are included during the install. Its seamless. Also, generally the package manager does tell you what it's installing.

The major Linux distros are very careful about this stuff. The two largest have huge enterprise user bases, and it's never been a problem.

Many of the Linux distros are extremely opinionated on what goes into their default package repositories - it's a major reason why you choose certain distros. You are delegating all of this concern about packages, compatibility, bug/security fixes, and licenses and whatever to the maintainers of the distro. They are very careful not to break existing systems, and aren't going to surprise you one day with a major disruptive change. For them to replace Redis, for instance, with Valkey, it's going to be on the next major os release, it'll be a drop in replacement (all Redis commands continue to work, etc), and you'll have an opportunity to see this change while installing packages. This isn't "shoot from the hip" npm style stuff...

Re: Redis is open source again

#492

Post by jhatemyjob »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #204
kstrauser wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which part of their explanation for rejecting it do you specifically disagree with?

The entire claim of https://opensource.org/blog/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-l... holds down to "the right to make use of the program for any field of endeavor" and the SSPL does not prohibit the use of software in any field of endeavor. The OSI then strays into a lot of nonsense that demonstrates just how bought and paid for they are, such as "the understanding that their work was going towards the greater good",…

Thank you and immibis for bringing this issue up. Always thought this was fishy. I don't fully understand this yet and will need to do more research. I bet these comments are unpopular because SSPL hurts GCP/AWS, which hurts YC.

Not saying the mods of HN are conspiring to bury these comments. But the fish rots from the head in upvote-ordered comment trees

Re: Redis is open source again

#493

Post by ensignavenger »

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #167

So with redis being AGPL, who counts as a user? If you have a webapp that uses redis on the backend for a task queue, do the users of the webapp count as users of redis, and you then have to provide source to redis? Is there a chance that you might have to release your apps code to be compliant?

This is my number one objection to the AGPL. Still way better than the SSPL or BUSL, but I will stick with valley for now.

Re: Redis is open source again

#494

Post by microflash »

c0l0 wrote: post #33

I contributed a minor (but imho still neat :p) improvement to Redis under its original license, and personally moved to using redict when the unexpected license change to SSPL was announced - and I was feeling betrayed as a contributor to a properly-FOSS-codebase. (Had they switched to AGPL right away, I'd have been perfectly fine with that change from a moral perspective, ftr.) I have a great deal of respect for ant…

Due to license rug pull, I started an org wide movement from Redis to Valkey early this year and now there’s no turning back. It also does not help Redis that Valkey is cheaper offering by AWS (at least through Elasticache).

Re: Redis is open source again

#495

Post by barotalomey »

antirez wrote: post #287
lolinder wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a win for the community over and against the corporations that are Redis and Elastic. They're not the good guys for giving in to the pressure. They tried to ride FOSS to prominence and then extract wealth on the backs of the community and found that the community mattered more than they did. So sure, let's celebrate, but celebrate the community, not those who tried to pull the rug out from under them.

I said exactly that's a win of the community. But money are needed to pay the folks that work at open source software, and the companies that went for the SSPL were trying to protect their business (and, as a side effect, wanted or not, the ability to pay for such work). I believe the software world failed to protect open source software in the cloud era, but in general the environment that we collectively created ma…

> But money are needed to pay the folks that work at open source software

Cute. Can I have a check for my redis contributions now please?

Re: Redis is open source again

#496

Post by ocdtrekkie »

jhatemyjob wrote: post #492
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire claim of https://opensource.org/blog/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-l... holds down to "the right to make use of the program for any field of endeavor" and the SSPL does not prohibit the use of software in any field of endeavor. The OSI then strays into a lot of nonsense that demonstrates just how bought and paid for they are, such as "the understanding that their work was going towards the greater good",…

Thank you and immibis for bringing this issue up. Always thought this was fishy. I don't fully understand this yet and will need to do more research. I bet these comments are unpopular because SSPL hurts GCP/AWS, which hurts YC. Not saying the mods of HN are conspiring to bury these comments. But the fish rots from the head in upvote-ordered comment trees

I have had my disagreements with dang over the years, but to be clear: I think the HN mods do incredible work. I disagree with some of their choices, but I don't think they moderate with an eye on YC's bottom line.

The OSI and the FSF are still extremely popular organizations despite their very big issues, I fully expect to upset some people when I bring this up. ;)

Re: Redis is open source again

#497

Post by trgn »

lolinder wrote: post #386
hmottestad wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dunno about Redis, but for Elastic I still feel sorry for them being thrown around like a rag doll by Amazon. On principal I will not use the Amazon fork, because I don’t want to support a company that would prefer to fork a project rather than fork over some cash. Amazon is more than willing to sell you their Elasticsearch fork at a loss as long as they can eventually recoup the losses when Elastic inevitably dies.…

> being thrown around like a rag doll by Amazon Can you elaborate on what exactly Amazon did to Elastic? I read all of their blog posts and the only thing I really got out of it was "they sell hosted Elastic cheaper than we can", which is hardly surprising given that Elastic really just packages up AWS/GCP/Azure cloud infra. That doesn't have to be AWS selling at a loss, AWS just doesn't need to pay itself. And by al…

Elastic was in the same bind as every company which writes opensource. There's no way to monetize it when a hyperscaler can sell it at much thinner margins.

Either the product is donated to a foundation, or the parent company dies.

While amazon technically wasn't doing anything "wrong", they're effectively squeezing the oxygen out of the ecosystem.

The parameters of the problem are relatively new. SAAS - which is now the norm for how software should be delivered, and opensource - which is old - just don't mix, the incentive structure is completely misaligned. Companies are prodding to see how to get out of this conundrum. Mongodb set the tone with the SSPL, and other midcap just kind of followed suit, what else was there to do, what other approaches could have been taken? Now, as the fallout starts to become clear, there's just a lot more information now on what works and doesn't, and companies are pivoting.

There's no vibes about it, it's brutal reality out there, big tech is strangling the market, and the small guys are figuring a way out, first trying one way, now another.

Re: Redis is open source again

#498

Post by barotalomey »

sigzero wrote: post #265
Alupis wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people switched to Valkey and didn't even know it. A lot like how many users are using MariaDB but think they are using MySQL. Several major linux distros transparently switched to Valkey and the users are none-the-wiser. On Fedora, for example, doing `sudo dnf install redis` just installs Valkey.

Well that's a reason not to use a distro right? If I type `sudo dnf install redis`, I want to install redis not valkey.

Problem is, redis threw their users under the bus by relicensing [1], and user would end up with an outdated redis version.

1: https://github.com/redis/redis/commit/0b34396924eca4edc52446...

Re: Redis is open source again

#499

Post by [deleted] »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #496
jhatemyjob wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you and immibis for bringing this issue up. Always thought this was fishy. I don't fully understand this yet and will need to do more research. I bet these comments are unpopular because SSPL hurts GCP/AWS, which hurts YC. Not saying the mods of HN are conspiring to bury these comments. But the fish rots from the head in upvote-ordered comment trees

I have had my disagreements with dang over the years, but to be clear: I think the HN mods do incredible work. I disagree with some of their choices, but I don't think they moderate with an eye on YC's bottom line. The OSI and the FSF are still extremely popular organizations despite their very big issues, I fully expect to upset some people when I bring this up. ;)

[deleted]

Re: Redis is open source again

#500

Post by jenadine »

umbra07 wrote: post #92
matesz wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, AGPL is a good license for enterprise, they don’t need to buy unless they want to modify source without releasing, am I wrong about this? Edit: Doubled checked with gpt, no cases of “infection” yet, there has also been many talks about this license being very good

the alternative is/was BSD. enterprise hates AGPL. AGPL is generally not a serious alternative to BSD/MIT in corpoland, because something something (A)GPL-poisoning. whether it's true or not doesn't matter. what matters is whether big tech considers AGPL infectious - which they do.

> whether it's true or not doesn't matter

It matters a lot. A company could potentially make choice that saves them a lot of money, so they better base their decisions on accurate information rather than rumours.

(Note also that big tech have different incentives)

Post reply on HN