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

Redis is forked

vickiboykis.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–206 of 206 posts

Re: Redis is forked

#201

Post by evanelias »

theamk wrote: post #198
evanelias wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you liked to use redis hosted by someone else [...] it is no longer possible That's not true though. Cloud vendors can choose to pay Redis Ltd to continue to offer "official" Redis as a managed product. Azure is doing this. AWS and GCP just chose not to.

Can't imagine Redis Ltd will be allowing cloud vendors to undercut their offering long-term. Even if Azure Redis is cheap now, just wait until the next low-performing quarter at Redis Ltd, and they'll raise Azure's fees to make their offering more attractive. They are the monopolist now, no one can force them to have fair prices.

I completely disagree with that prediction. When comparing the operating costs of a first-party vs third-party managed Redis service, cloud vendors have substantially lower operating costs for their underlying infrastructure (servers / data centers) than Redis Ltd. This means the cloud vendors can still offer a competitively-priced product, despite having to pay Redis Ltd for licensing fees.

Cloud vendors can also offer better inter-op between their managed Redis product and their other managed services, availability of managed Redis in every single region the cloud vendor offers, lower latency, etc. The managed offering directly from Redis Ltd can't compete on those qualities.

Additionally, Redis Ltd is motivated to not massively jack up fees on Azure, because in that situation Azure could switch to ValKey (or any other fork, or an in-house compatible re-write -- which they already have one of) and tell Redis Ltd to pound sand, like what AWS and GCP did.

Market forces are what makes Redis Ltd have fair prices, and this inherently means there's no monopoly.

Re: Redis is forked

#202

Post by jen20 »

eadmund wrote: post #182
vertis wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the very early days of Terraform, when it was 2 months or so old I helped a little. How many people did (so much more than me) with all these projects to be later betrayed by relicensing. > git log --pretty=format:"%h %an %ad %s" --date=short | grep "Luke Chadwick" dcd6449245 Luke Chadwick 2014-07-30 Add documentation for elb health_check 0eed0908df Luke Chadwick 2014-07-30 Add health_check to aws_elb resource 96c…

> How many people did (so much more than me) with all these projects to be later betrayed by relicensing. Were you betrayed? They did a thing you licensed them to do. That’s the whole point of non-copyleft free software licenses, after all! It’s kind of odd to specifically choose a license which allows others to use one’s code in proprietary software, then be upset when others use one’s code in proprietary software.…

Just to be clear: MPLv2 is a copyleft license.

Re: Redis is forked

#203

Post by vertis »

eadmund wrote: post #182
vertis wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the very early days of Terraform, when it was 2 months or so old I helped a little. How many people did (so much more than me) with all these projects to be later betrayed by relicensing. > git log --pretty=format:"%h %an %ad %s" --date=short | grep "Luke Chadwick" dcd6449245 Luke Chadwick 2014-07-30 Add documentation for elb health_check 0eed0908df Luke Chadwick 2014-07-30 Add health_check to aws_elb resource 96c…

> How many people did (so much more than me) with all these projects to be later betrayed by relicensing. Were you betrayed? They did a thing you licensed them to do. That’s the whole point of non-copyleft free software licenses, after all! It’s kind of odd to specifically choose a license which allows others to use one’s code in proprietary software, then be upset when others use one’s code in proprietary software.…

They can and did use it in commercial software before relicensing. I don't have a problem with that. It's a betrayal to get a huge community together under one expectation and then decide you don't like that expectation any more. Had they used, even something like AGPL from the start it would not have been successful in the same way, would not have gotten the same levels of outside contributions, so yes it's a betrayal.

It's a limited betrayal, because that license also allows for OpenTofu to exist and fork, but the need to do that is just annoying.

Re: Redis is forked

#204

Post by eadmund »

jen20 wrote: post #202
eadmund wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How many people did (so much more than me) with all these projects to be later betrayed by relicensing. Were you betrayed? They did a thing you licensed them to do. That’s the whole point of non-copyleft free software licenses, after all! It’s kind of odd to specifically choose a license which allows others to use one’s code in proprietary software, then be upset when others use one’s code in proprietary software.…

Just to be clear: MPLv2 is a copyleft license.

Doh! You’re right.

Re: Redis is forked

#205

Post by deanCommie »

hnthrowaway6543 wrote: post #4

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…

> people won't want AWS/GCP/Azure to slap a UI on top of their free open-source product and resell it, making tens of millions of dollars per day in the process

Then build that UI yourself and sell it and make millions of dollars per day yourself, noone is stopping them.

Ah but you see there are 2 problems: 1/ "UIs" are harder than people think, especially by those that use that term derisively like you did. There are PLENTY of popular products that are basically just UI on existing data.

2/ AWS/GCP/Azure aren't slapping UIs. They're offering "managed operations" for these products. What is it? And sure, Hackernews is likely to scoff at that - we know how this site feels about dropbox -> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

But if it didn't offer value, people wouldn't pay for it. Redis engineers are good at building a key value storage. AWS/GCP/Azure engineers are good at building managed operations. Combine them together and you've got the best of both worlds.

AWS/GCP/Azure aren't making money off Redis, they're making money off their experience in operating cloud infrastructure. And the free market wants to pay them to do so.

Re: Redis is forked

#206

Post by nurple »

bevekspldnw wrote: post #196
nurple wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said money-obsessed, not greedy, not really the same thing, but it is something that's becoming more and more pervasive. Case in point, your whole response was focused purely on money. I actually find it pretty interesting that there's so much hostility towards my posts when I attempt to start a discussion on alternatives to our present and decaying society. Like, it is a lack of imagination? A resignation to reali…

I’ve been working in digital rights and advocacy for years. High rhetoric isn’t how you change things, it’s long-term commitment to meaningful action that must be sustained or it will falter. My annoyance is that I’ve had this discussion a hundred times and unless you are in the trenches trying to make change while supporting your family I’m not really interested in musings on what a better world looks like, I’m busy…

Now that's something I can work with. I don't intentionally spout high rhetoric as a way to chastise or belittle, though I admit I do let frustration leak into my words. I honestly am looking for how I and more people can be a part of a change, I do _want_ productive discussions.

This week has been an interesting one for me, my perspective has shifted quite drastically. Honestly I was bitter, I found that I was unintentionally on a mission to inflate perceived injustices to create bad people in my mind, ostensibly for the purpose of making myself look "good" in comparison. I let that need leak into my interpersonal interactions in an attempt to push that juxtaposition into other people's minds.

I'm not in the trenches like you because I spent a decade focusing on bootstrapping a company because I wanted money, and I selfishly wanted to just ignore everything that bothered me and focus on what I loved doing. In the end it ruined most of what I actually value, and that changed me in ways I hadn't realized; in the end I burned myself and bridges as those things began to crumble.

I will say that I've thought a lot about our conversation this week as I've been trying to find a path to somewhere better, as I do struggle a lot with what you're saying as I have kids of my own, some adult, who are seriously struggling because of the screwed up money obsessed world we find ourselves in.

A pretty big part of the torment I was laying on myself was because I didn't feel like I deserved the monetary success I had worked so hard to find, I felt like liquidating my value as my co-founder had was tantamount to becoming one of those people I so fervently despised. I've instead been trying to prove to myself that I could do it again on my own, with the expected result.

I decided to call our investor this week and negotiated a buyout of my equity. Now I guess I just need to figure out how I can turn that into some good in the world. I'm incredibly grateful at this point actually, I've experienced having nothing, I've experience true hopelessness, and I've experienced how much even a small gesture by someone who cares can drastically change one's circumstances and frame of mind.

If there's anything you could share with me about your experience in advocacy, I would be humbly thankful.

I apologize for how I treated you.

Post reply on HN