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

211–220 of 815 posts

Re: Redis is open source again

#211

Post by _msw_ »

antirez wrote: post #47
dismalaf wrote: post #13

AGPL is cancer. Valkey already exists, people already switched, it's already landed in a bunch of distros. I don't see anyone moving back, especially when Valkey has some big corporate support. And for my personal usage, Rails 8 has moved Redis functionality into the database by default, which works fine.

RMS was enough of a genius to understand the potential of open source software, and basically gave us, with GPL and his evangelism (and his code! plenty of it), and the free software movement, the software world we are living now. AGPL reflects the fact that he understood before everybody else that something was happening with software as a service. I love the BSD license, but now who says that AGPL is a cancer is ma…

RMS was not convinced that the Affero clause was a good idea as a general rule, though he approved the Affero-sponsored fork of the GPL that created AGPLv1. Hence, he did not support the addition of network copyleft obligations in GPLv3 during its drafting.

RMS has long expressed concerns about "Service as a Software Substitute" [1], and I think he hesitated to endorse the AGPL because it would conflict with his philosophy on the dangers of "Service as a Software Substitute".

Henry Poole should be given credit for raising the concern; Bradley M. Kuhn and Eben Moglen should be given the credit for advancing the license to address the concern.

It took a long time for the Free Software Foundation to accept Affero versions of the GPL under their stewardship with the release of AGPLv3.

So, perhaps he did understand before many people that services posed some challenges for his social movement. But it's my belief that he favored self-reliance and maximum "freedom" by running computer programs on hardware you own yourself as the remedy, rather than extending copyleft obligations to reach over the network.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s...

Re: Redis is open source again

#212

Post by Tostino »

kiitos wrote: post #186
rustc wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All evidence I can find, regardless of domain or context, suggests Redis vs. valkey marketshare is something around a 99%/1% difference. What evidence did you find?

[flagged]

Why/how would you expect an LLM to know that info?

Re: Redis is open source again

#213

Post by detaro »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #179
kstrauser wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a widely accepted claim. I do not see SSPL as open source, and neither do OSI[0] or FSF[1] or Debian[2]. [0] https://opensource.org/blog/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-l... [1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html [2] https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/

We need to stop taking the OSI or FSF's positions on anything as particularly valuable. The OSI is captured entirely by corporate sponsors. Amazon was paying a full-time salary a year to the OSI when the SSPL issue happened, the OSI had no ability to take a moral pro-labor stance without crippling their own operations. They still do not meaningfully answer to individual users: The OSI recently refused to disclose who…

Many people came to the same conclusion about SSPL just by reading it when it was released, before any OSI position on it.

Re: Redis is open source again

#214

Post by arghwhat »

reconditerose wrote: post #208
avinassh wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Garnet fascinates me. Their benchmarks even claim that it is better than Redis and also Dragonfly. Are there any papers or write ups explaining what makes Garnet fast? (I do know its based on FASTER)

The tl;dr is it's just a lockless hashmap attached to a TCP server with a log. Simple Get/Set operations are highly optimized, so with high batching they are able to efficiently fetch a lot of data efficiently. The architectures scales very well when you add threads and data access that is uniform. It struggles a bit on certain types of workloads like hot keys, think heavy hitting a single sorted set. It's a cool arc…

That's... Pretty much exactly what you'd expect from a KV store. It's a hashmap on the network.

Re: Redis is open source again

#216

Post by jraph »

gray_-_wolf wrote: post #184
_msw_ wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? They can already just copy the code they want from Valkey, since Valkey is 3 clause BSD... But maybe Valkey should switch to GPLv3 instead to correct this imbalance. https://github.com/redis/redis/pull/13638

I am not sure what that would achieve? Combining programs under GPLv3 and AGPLv3 is possible (the resulting work is under AGPLv3).

The imbalance I think _msw_ refers to is the fact that Valkey couldn't both take code from a GPL-licenced Redis and keep its license.

So either they relicense, or they can't take code from Redis but Redis can take code from Valkey.

Re: Redis is open source again

#217

Post by ramon156 »

cortesoft wrote: post #178
placatedmayhem wrote: post #3

I'm curious whether the community will trust Redis-the-company again after this, or if they'll choose to stick with Valkey. The other concern is at least some big company legal departments are wary of AGPL software, which makes Valkey, still BSD, more attractive to them. Edit: Regardless, thank you and the rest of the folks inside Redis for pushing to bring this back to OSS!

We kept using redis, the license change never affected us. We had no reason to switch.

Same here. The response from the community was valid, but basically didn't affect us.

Re: Redis is open source again

#218

Post by umajho »

MinIO also switched to AGPLv3 a while back, and they stated that “the AGPL license requires that all software connecting with MinIO be 100% open source for you/your users not to be in violation of the license.”[^1] Since Redis and MinIO are somewhat similar, (Both can be used to store and retrieve data. Redis uses a custom protocol, and MinIO uses an S3-compatible API.) Should I assume that this statement also applies to Redis?

[^1]: https://github.com/minio/minio/issues/13308#issuecomment-929...

Re: Redis is open source again

#219

Post by Alupis »

KolmogorovComp wrote: post #139
Alupis wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft has a habit of "fake" open source. Particularly on Github. By "fake", I mean Microsoft largely treats their Open Source codebases like they are closed-source, in-house proprietary codebases that they happen to let members of the public look at. They'll accept a PR once in a while, but mostly it appears Issues and PR's are used as a free alternative to UserVoice. Every decision is made behind closed doors (p…

You’re confusing open source and open to contribution. Is SQLite not open-source?

Perhaps... when I look at an Open Source codebase, I expect there to not just be source you can read, but also a way to contribute and engage with the codebase creators, beyond just bug reporting (aka. Github Issues).

While it may technically be open source due to it's license and you can literally go look at the source - Microsoft is operating these codebases as-if they are proprietary. Every decision is made out of public - and I would not be surprised to learn they have their own internal tracker for the "real" backlog items. You frequently see command/comments by Microsoft employees which clearly are triggering workflows in their real backlog tracker, and near-zero discussion happens in Github by Microsoft employees, and when it does - it's clearly through a PR filter.

Like I said, beggars can't be choosers and it's better to have this than nothing - but I don't really think Microsoft has grasped the true concept of FOSS as-of yet.

> Is SQLite not open-source?

Not really in my opinion either. There's no way to contribute at all... best you can do it raise hell on the forums about a particular issue you want to see fixed. So while it's Open Source in the strict sense, it's not Open Source in the general sense.

Re: Redis is open source again

#220

Post by dharmab »

Alupis wrote: post #131
jayofdoom wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it's worse? https://github.com/microsoft/garnet/blob/main/LICENSE It's MIT licensed?

Microsoft has a habit of "fake" open source. Particularly on Github. By "fake", I mean Microsoft largely treats their Open Source codebases like they are closed-source, in-house proprietary codebases that they happen to let members of the public look at. They'll accept a PR once in a while, but mostly it appears Issues and PR's are used as a free alternative to UserVoice. Every decision is made behind closed doors (p…

I make an open source, MIT licensed piece of software. I don't accept unsolicited contributions, but I document that people are free to fork the code and provide instructions on how to develop, test and build on your machine.

Am I "fake open source"?

Post reply on HN