Live data from Hacker News

Redis is open source again

antirez.com

431–440 of 815 posts

Re: Redis is open source again

#431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no possible way to compete against someone else who doesn't need to fund the development of the software but can still take in all the revenues and profits from deploying it as a service.

Not true, you can compete with the quality of the deployed service _separate_ from the development of the software. The quality of the service can include internal, at-scale optimizations that don't affect user-facing parity with the open-source software. Open source companies with SaaS offerings need to have plans to differentiate themselves on hosting quality, not features. Yes, you can do better at hosting your ow…

> Not true, you can compete with the quality of the deployed service _separate_ from the development of the software.

That is true in a literal sense but (anecdotally) from the point of view of an engineer deploying ie; Redis, there is no real space for that angle of competition when the choice is between having to go through procurement hurdles to sign a contract with Redis Labs versus say; spinning up Redis on AWS which has zero hurdles because there is already an organization wide agreement in place for example.

The competition there isn't a level playing field as the deck is kind of stacked for most businesses where engineers don't have free reign to procurement what might be objectively the best hosting solution?

I've never really thought through this in any depth before now so don't consider this a great fleshed out argument, just an observation from my personal experience.

Re: Redis is open source again

#432
Note AGPL license is in completely different class compared to BSD. Where BSD was level playing field allowing anyone to do commercial derivatives, now only Redis can do it.

I also question whenever this decision comes from the pure change of heart rather than threat of Valkey... and if so what else should we expect in the future

Re: Redis is open source again

#433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, we just did this whole ride with Elastic [0]: company changes the license out from under the community, community revolts, company gives up and changes it back. Both companies even pulled the same "it worked" excuse ("while it was painful, it worked", "this achieved our goal"). Neither company has built in a legal safety mechanism to prevent themselves from pulling the rug again later and both companies have sh…

NATS almost ended up doing it recently, too. Fortunately they caved in just today, after the CNCF and the community protested. [1] While the outcome is great, it was a bunch of drama for nothing, and their reputation has been harmed. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43863721

Yep. Actually if Redis would end up in CNCF and Redis Labs could provide commercial hosting, extensions - this would be outcome I would be excited about

Re: Redis is open source again

#435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, we just did this whole ride with Elastic [0]: company changes the license out from under the community, community revolts, company gives up and changes it back. Both companies even pulled the same "it worked" excuse ("while it was painful, it worked", "this achieved our goal"). Neither company has built in a legal safety mechanism to prevent themselves from pulling the rug again later and both companies have sh…

This keeps happening: 1. People put a lot of work into building databases. The license choice is OSS / FOSS. 2. Some people in the community (original authors, community leads) make a company around the database and continue developing it for years on end. They sometimes raise venture capital to expand the business. 3. Amazon / Google / Microsoft offer managed versions of the database and make bank on it. Easily mill…

Or start with the AGPL from the start instead of a pushover license and sell alternative licenses to hyper scalers if they want it.

Re: Redis is open source again

#436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This notion that open source projects aren't really open source unless they welcome all contributions is one of the dumber ideas in the world.

Having worked a few places that have major open source projects, it was eye opening to see how pervasive this seems to have become. It feels like over my lifetime I've watched the value/expectations/demands/definition of OSS shift from "source is available, and I can make changes to my own copy/fork of of it if required" to "source is available, and I will demand you make changes to it for me"

heh, related: https://x.com/mitchellh/status/1918055154991202470

Re: Redis is open source again

#437
I would love to see Amazon offer a Redis service, comply with the AGPLv3 instead of using the other Redis licensing options and do revenue sharing to incentivise more commercial source-available projects to go that route.

Re: Redis is open source again

#438
post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the problem is the definition of Open Source is controlled by the Open Source Initiative, which has been captured by the hyperscalers which is sort of funny because the term "Open Source" was itself coined to make it possible for people to seek funding to build companies based on the (crazy?) idea of producing software, then giving away its source code 20 years later, the structure of the industry has now changed, an…

Take a look at Debian’s philosophy: https://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines This predates the OSI definition. The philosophy is about what empowers the user. Business models (or their challenges) have nothing to do with it. It just so happens that empowering the user also empowers competitors.

The OSD is basically a copy of the DFSG btw

Re: Redis is open source again

#439
post #409

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.…

Whats the point of open source if you can't fork or sell hosted clusters? Also from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSearch_(software) : > On September 16, 2024, the Linux Foundation and Amazon Web Services announced the creation of the OpenSearch Software Foundation.[15][16] Ownership of OpenSearch software was transferred from Amazon to OpenSearch Software Foundation, which is organized as an open technical projec…

Amazon's product had confusing naming and positioning, and lagged in compatibility which created a headache for Elastic.

And they were using an open source piece of software, but scaling it with closed source secret sauce on top of that. The license was saying they'd have to open up their secret sauce or pay, and their response was to leave the table instead.

OpenSearch still lacks tons of really basic functionality from Elastisearch, and watching how far ahead Elasticsearch got as a product shows how much free lunch Amazon was getting... and how much they actually cared about the product when it was time for them to put their money where their mouth was (despite AWS pulling Elastic's yearly revenue every 4 days).

Elasticsearch has generally matured like it has a passionate builder with a vision. They pushed on two major fronts (LLMs and Observability) and managed to execute effectively without letting product quality slip.

Meanwhile OpenSearch is still the place where tickets requesting 3+ year old ES functionality go to die.

-

I'm honestly on the opposite side: how is the hyperscaler offering a strictly inferior product with closed extensions and still managing to eat the main developers' lunches for the sole reason they already have sales pipelines established not the bad guy?

I guess I'm not really someone who believes in infinite scaling rules: something that can work at the individual scale doesn't have to work when hyperscalers do it (like selling hosted clusters)

Re: Redis is open source again

#440
post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MIT is one of the least restrictive licenses. If you think otherwise, I suggest checking if there's any aluminium foil on your head.

As a end user, I find it quite restrictive. There might be some software I won't be able to fork/modify because they were MIT. I'm not the owner of the software anymore.

The MIT license always allows you to fork/modify the project. You wouldn't be the copyright owner of the existing code in your fork, but you could be the owner of the project, and the copyright owner of any new code you add.
Post reply on HN