No need to trust them. Use it and if the license changes fork it again. Where is the problem?
Redis is open source again
411–420 of 815 posts
Re: Redis is open source again
#412Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your company invested hundreds of engineering hours switching from Redis to a clean fork of Redis?
I can easily see this for a midsize company. While it's likely an easy process to drop in valkey, creating the new instances, migrating apps to those new instances, and making sure there's not some hidden regression (even though it's "drop in") all takes time. At a minimum, 1 or 2 hours per app optimistically. My company has hundreds of apps (hurray microservices). That's where "hundreds of hours" seems pretty reason…
> My company has hundreds of apps (hurray microservices). That's where "hundreds of hours" seems pretty reasonable to me.
Sounds like a huge disadvantage in your company’s choice of software architecture to me.
Re: Redis is open source again
#413Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can easily see this for a midsize company. While it's likely an easy process to drop in valkey, creating the new instances, migrating apps to those new instances, and making sure there's not some hidden regression (even though it's "drop in") all takes time. At a minimum, 1 or 2 hours per app optimistically. My company has hundreds of apps (hurray microservices). That's where "hundreds of hours" seems pretty reason…
> My company has hundreds of apps (hurray microservices). That's where "hundreds of hours" seems pretty reasonable to me. Sounds like a huge disadvantage in your company’s choice of software architecture to me.
There's definitely pros and cons to this approach.
The pro being that every service is an island that can be independently updated and managed when needs be. Scaling is also somewhat nicer as you only need to scale the services under heavy load rather than larger services.
It also makes for better separation of systems. The foo system gets a foo database and when both are under load we only have to discuss increasing hardware for the foo system/database and not the everything database.
The cons are that it's more complex and consistency is nearly impossible (though we are mostly consistent). It also means that if we need a system wide replacement of a service like redis, you have to visit our 100+ services to see who depends on it. That rarely comes up as most companies don't do what redis did.
Re: Redis is open source again
#414Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
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.
This would suck if you wrote scripts that looked for a process called 'redis' running on your machine.
Re: Redis is open source again
#415Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really not though. The OSI quickly loses credibility when they try to push a definition that the community doesn't like (see the Open Source AI kerfuffle). Both the OSI and the FSF are agreed that Source Available with bans on specific use cases is not FOSS. When you've got freaking Richard Stallman opposing you you really have to do better than just scream "corporate capture". Engage with his idea of Freedom, d…
the OSI and the FSF agree, for different reasons > Both the OSI and the FSF are agreed that Source Available with bans on specific use cases is not FOSS. well... yes, because they decide the definition of the terms > When you've got freaking Richard Stallman opposing you you really have to do better than just scream "corporate capture". Engage with his idea of Freedom, don't set up straw men. Stallman has a very part…
The AGPLv3 or later is both free and open source and should be the de facto license of choice in my opinion for mass adoption.
Re: Redis is open source again
#416Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe AGPL + time + contributors makes that very difficult. It also means that if you have a commercial product that uses Redis you need to open source your stuff though, so not net better imu. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Nope, looks like they still require a CLA for code contributions, which means they can release it under whatever license they want. https://github.com/redis/redis/blob/unstable/CONTRIBUTING.md
Hmmm. Yes, agree.
Re: Redis is open source again
#417Literally the day after I started working on moving to Valkey... That's how it goes.
Re: Redis is open source again
#418Earlier 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…
My understanding is the dispute was mostly about the trademark. Here is a link: https://www.elastic.co/blog/why-license-change-aws (original license change in 2021, not the most recent one).
Re: Redis is open source again
#419From the CEO blog post - https://redis.io/blog/agplv3/ >This achieved our goal—AWS and Google now maintain their own fork Was this really the goal though? Forcing your biggest users to fork your software and maintain their own divergent version is not really good for anyone. Sure, Amazon and Google (or AWS and GCP - type confusion in the source material) now have to contribute some more engineering hours to the open…
Are there compensating benefits? For web browsers, having multiple, competing implementations is considered good.
Are there benefits to the ecosystem? Possibly.
But the person you replied to was talking about Redis's goal, and I don't think it's likely their goal had anything to do with having a competitor to themselves around. Even if they did want that, they could've just bankrolled (or engineered) a fork; changing a license to one that causes your largest users to do the work themselves is a rather roundabout way to do it.
I can almost kind of see the large users needing to work together on a replacement, meaning that replacement might as well be open-source, meaning Redis can get future improvements that were funded by the fork users (who Redis was upset wasn't paying them) as a semi-vindictive, semi-useful goal. But it's still roundabout. If that was really the plan, it could've been articulated better in this postmortem to make it clear the "goal" bit hadn't just been BS'd.
Re: Redis is open source again
#420Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am thinking the same that going to AGPL may actually push more people to Valkey. Although I haven't checked if ValKey any substantial development since the fork.
In fact, some of Redis 8’s new features were taken from Valkey source code.
Lol feels a little hypocritical to complain about proprietary clouds, then take open source software from a competitor and embed it into your own