131–140 of 206 posts
Valkey is the way for me...not that much to think or consider...
Can you expand on the high points from your perspective? Thanks.
I thought the author was bringing in genAI for little reason...then I clicked through. For some reason storing vectors and chats is core to Redis' vision of its future. ( https://redis.io/blog/the-future-of-redis/ ) I'm, generally, a mobile dev so I'm not familiar with redis. My handwave-y understanding is its a in-memory key/value DB. I don't understand how that brings anything to the table for genAI. Couldn't the p…
The queries it's good at are not "what vectors map to this filename", but "what pieces of text are closest to this vector, and what metadata do we have about them?" This is a non-trivial problem to solve if you don't want your queries to be O(n) where n is the dataset size.
This is useful because AI models can transform any kind of content (usually text or images) into vectors, in a way that content similar in meaning is transformed to vectors that are close to each other. This can be used e.g. find all documents related to your search query, even if your search keywords are never directly mentioned, to find articles similar to the one you're currently reading, to search images by their descriptions, or even to see how closely a user submission matches "undesirable" content, like spam or porn.
I agree that specialized vector databases are a little silly though, considering that Postgres and others have vector extensions now.
Generally my stance with these forks born from community drama is "wait and see." Sometimes the fork will gain traction and become the de facto "true" version (see Hudson -> Jenkins). Sometimes the fork will flop and people will largely stick to the original despite whatever caused the schism (see Terraform -> OpenTofu). Many of these recent forks are being done because people won't want AWS/GCP/Azure to slap a UI on…
What's the situation with Opensearch which came from elastic after license changed so it stops getting get abused by aws.
Why, unlike Redis and Elasticsearch and Terraform, was there no big community fork of MongoDB when it was relicensed? Cockroach, Materialize, and MariaDB were all also relicensed without massive backlash, I think. But I think that's because they had fewer users at the time. But Mongo's was the one relicense event that didn't produce so much shock that a new fork came out of it. And Mongo's stock is doing great, if th…
Definitely an interesting question. Some things that may explain why -- Mongo was always AGPL and relicensed to SSPL. This had the following consequences: * Very few companies and zero large cloud companies ever attempted to run the MongoDB codebase in production as a managed service, other than MongoDB the company. * Mostly because of the above, MongoDB did not receive many code contributions that did not originate…
Other people that didn't own the copyright to any mongodb source code of course had the right to take the source code and fork it under the AGPL. But there would have been no choice about the license under which to distribute that fork because of how strict AGPL is. By insisting on copyright transfers, Mongodb was able to dodge that and re-license the entire code base without having to require permission from anyone because they owned all of it.
For the same reason, there never was much of a community of contributors outside of Mongo. Most large companies would have steered clear of that legal mess and declined to contribute or fork. The flip side of course is that this strong ownership marginalized mongodb as a community even before the license change. It simply didn't matter much to most large companies as they would have steered clear of it anyway.
With Redis, this is not the case. Redis the company was an active contributor to the code base but most of the contributions actually came from the outside and they never owned the copyright to those contributions. The BSD license allows anyone (including Redis Inc.) to redistribute the code under whatever license. Which is why Redis can do this. But for the same reason everybody else can continue as is using Valkey without having to worry much about Redis the company having retired from what otherwise is a thriving OSS community.
I am pleased that Valkey has made the decision to remain independent from the competing Redict fork project. The dogmatism on display in that thread is frustrating. It is one thing to stand by your own principles and opinions, it is entirely another thing to aggressively push your opinions onto others. With the two projects remaining independent, we will get to see which kind of community stewardship results in project success and longevity. The alternative, I fear, might have been technically minded people being railroaded by ideologically driven zealots.
Dogmatism and zealotry are words we probably mostly associate with religion, but I think they apply exactly to the kind of people I would proactively exclude from any public community I was trying to build.
1. https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey/issues/18#issuecomment-2...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Best example for a successful fork is gitea. It's so incredible what they have achieved since the fork from gogs
(And then gitea was forked into forgejo, which is used by codeberg, iiuc)
Do you know what the main differences are and whether it is worth switching?
Why, unlike Redis and Elasticsearch and Terraform, was there no big community fork of MongoDB when it was relicensed? Cockroach, Materialize, and MariaDB were all also relicensed without massive backlash, I think. But I think that's because they had fewer users at the time. But Mongo's was the one relicense event that didn't produce so much shock that a new fork came out of it. And Mongo's stock is doing great, if th…
You may be thinking of their separate MaxScale proxy product, which uses the Business Source License, which MariaDB created.
As somebody who pulled down an open source project I find this trope of FOSS losing its way for greed utterly disingenuous. People need to put food on the table, period. I’ve had people take my work and make more money from it than I have, with no attribution or credit. Then I pulled it down and got a lot of people asking why it’s no longer free, when I tell them I can sell them a license they don’t even reply. I car…
The point is to benefit humanity, not make money. With that said, sure this ideology seems impossible to realize change in the current money-obsessed world, but the thing is that these ideologies are simply incompatible. Yes, I'd say that you are also unfortunately money-obsessed, your whole post is centered on it; I don't blame you though, I also have to focus a majority of my life on money to raise my children, but…
Also, for what it’s worth, I’ve forgone millions of dollars in compensation over the years to work on socially beneficial projects, and literally just left $250k on the table last year alone. But yeah, wanting to support my family makes me greedy.
AGPL ensures no one will serve your software via network without also showing their code (which they can avoid by buying commercial licenses and thus funding the project) and no CLAs ensures that the project can not be relicensed without every contributor agreeing. (after all, if really every person can agree it is a good idea there might be some merit to it).
As somebody who pulled down an open source project I find this trope of FOSS losing its way for greed utterly disingenuous. People need to put food on the table, period. I’ve had people take my work and make more money from it than I have, with no attribution or credit. Then I pulled it down and got a lot of people asking why it’s no longer free, when I tell them I can sell them a license they don’t even reply. I car…
Yep, free software originated among academics employed by institutions who paid them for things things other than their creation of software. And good on them! But there just aren't enough professors, grad students, or young people with plenty of extra time on their hands, to build all this stuff for free.
Academic peer review doesn’t include code review.