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

Why AWS Supports Valkey

aws.amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 123 posts

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#61

Post by mooreds »

tecoholic wrote: post #44
dig1 wrote: post #26

It's interesting how Redis's decision is often defended while AWS and other 'big corps' are criticized. Let's not forget that Redis was a collaborative effort built on the contributions of many, including those funded by big corporations: gcc/compilers, kernel, editors, VMs, etc. If the Redis authors, who were part of this collaborative ecosystem, decided to change their approach, it's their prerogative. However, it'…

I get that people get upset that their software of choice license is changed at the philosophical level. But I don’t get it at the economical level. When a project changes the license for a future version, the older versions are still available in the older open license right? So the contributions from collaborative effort is still usable under the same terms in those versions. So what’s this “bait and switch”? Licen…

What you're missing is that people contribute (time, energy, code, attention) in the now expecting to be able to reap the benefits into the future.

When I learn redis, I spend time and want to amortize that over a long period. When I integrate elastic search into my application, I expect to be able to use it in the same way far into the future.

Relicensing, as you point out, doesn't affect past versions, but it sure does future ones.

Now I have a surprise chore on my plate, to figure out if and how I need to replace the existing component or learn about an alternative.

More than that, my confidence is shaken. Will they make changes in the future requiring more work on my part?

Changing a license is very similar to an increase in price, but even more fundamental in terms of uncertainty. And people hate change.

(I'm explicitly not addressing the impact of a license change on software freedom because I think it is very important to some. But IMO most folks are more interested in free as in beer than free as in speech. I don't know enough to speak to the free as in speech aspect, so won't.)

I think you asked a great question, hope my answer sheds some light.

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#62

Post by redwood »

dig1 wrote: post #26

It's interesting how Redis's decision is often defended while AWS and other 'big corps' are criticized. Let's not forget that Redis was a collaborative effort built on the contributions of many, including those funded by big corporations: gcc/compilers, kernel, editors, VMs, etc. If the Redis authors, who were part of this collaborative ecosystem, decided to change their approach, it's their prerogative. However, it'…

Re "But we (small companies and devs) now have to spend time migrating and moving things around without any additional value."

You shouldn't have to do anything: I don't get it I think you're making a choice because you have a preference for non-copyleft licenses in software you use? That's your choice

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#63

Post by binary132 »

dig1 wrote: post #26

It's interesting how Redis's decision is often defended while AWS and other 'big corps' are criticized. Let's not forget that Redis was a collaborative effort built on the contributions of many, including those funded by big corporations: gcc/compilers, kernel, editors, VMs, etc. If the Redis authors, who were part of this collaborative ecosystem, decided to change their approach, it's their prerogative. However, it'…

How old is Redis again? It seems like a pretty big stretch to accuse them of having just been baiting people into depending on it this entire time.

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#65

Post by MyFedora »

tsimionescu wrote: post #10
_3u10 wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Yes, of course. That is a major reason why people use open source. And since AWS was a contributor to Redis, why it would be absurd for them to pay license fees on a project they helped build and maintain.

So if I develop a niche feature relevant to a handful of people and contribute it upstream, I'm entitled to a free perpetual license to future software updates, even though a select few core developers, who are by and large paid Red Hat employees, do all of the work? I'm sorry, but Amazon didn't do much for Redis. I'd argue that they did the exact opposite: Indirectly defund the people who did all of the work to make Redis happen. Given the forced opportunity to fund the core developers, they noped out real quick to gain more control over costs and the software project itself. I hope that Red Hat learned their lesson and use strong copyleft licenses in the future to avoid this toxic situation.

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#66

Post by tecoholic »

mooreds wrote: post #61
tecoholic wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that people get upset that their software of choice license is changed at the philosophical level. But I don’t get it at the economical level. When a project changes the license for a future version, the older versions are still available in the older open license right? So the contributions from collaborative effort is still usable under the same terms in those versions. So what’s this “bait and switch”? Licen…

What you're missing is that people contribute (time, energy, code, attention) in the now expecting to be able to reap the benefits into the future. When I learn redis, I spend time and want to amortize that over a long period. When I integrate elastic search into my application, I expect to be able to use it in the same way far into the future. Relicensing, as you point out, doesn't affect past versions, but it sure…

Thank you. I was more interested in the “free as in beer” part of the reaction. So it absolutely addresses my question.

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#67

Post by chipdart »

tecoholic wrote: post #44
dig1 wrote: post #26

It's interesting how Redis's decision is often defended while AWS and other 'big corps' are criticized. Let's not forget that Redis was a collaborative effort built on the contributions of many, including those funded by big corporations: gcc/compilers, kernel, editors, VMs, etc. If the Redis authors, who were part of this collaborative ecosystem, decided to change their approach, it's their prerogative. However, it'…

I get that people get upset that their software of choice license is changed at the philosophical level. But I don’t get it at the economical level. When a project changes the license for a future version, the older versions are still available in the older open license right? So the contributions from collaborative effort is still usable under the same terms in those versions. So what’s this “bait and switch”? Licen…

> So the contributions from collaborative effort is still usable under the same terms in those versions. So what’s this “bait and switch”?

It's undoubtedly bait and switch.

You have a company that portrays itself as the host of a project that relies on community contributions for maintenance, and all of a sudden that host unilaterally forces a licensing change where all users, including those who have been directly and indirectly contributing to maintain the project, are faced with an invoice-or-lawyer threat.

Yes, the source code is still available. Yes, anyone can pick up the last release and run with it. But it isn't business as usual anymore.

It disrupted day-to-day operations of all companies that have been using the software. Managers of all levels had to hold meetings, internal and across organizations. They had to ask lawyers questions and decide what to do and how to act based on their answers. People scrambled to react to this change.

To make matters worse, this change was overtly designed to extort money from it's users. There is no two ways around it. The first step is a sudden change in licensing terms, and expectedly the second step of sending in the lawyers to collect payments under threat of legal action.

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#68

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

I'm sorry, I just hate this foul language. Amazon claims that "Redis broke with the community that helped it grow and left them stranded" whereas the sole reason for the license change was Amazon itself who takes open source projects and gives its creators nothing in exchange. They will bend over backwards and create their own forks like OpenSearch rather than collaborate with the creators. And at the end, they will stab the creators with passive and active-aggressive accusations like these.

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#69

Post by chrisoverzero »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #68

I'm sorry, I just hate this foul language. Amazon claims that "Redis broke with the community that helped it grow and left them stranded" whereas the sole reason for the license change was Amazon itself who takes open source projects and gives its creators nothing in exchange. They will bend over backwards and create their own forks like OpenSearch rather than collaborate with the creators. And at the end, they will…

> […] rather than collaborate with the creators.

How do you propose AWS “collaborate” with Elastic or Redis Labs under the terms of the SSPL? Also, who do you believe the creators of Redis are?

Re: Why AWS Supports Valkey

#70

Post by physicsguy »

tecoholic wrote: post #44
dig1 wrote: post #26

It's interesting how Redis's decision is often defended while AWS and other 'big corps' are criticized. Let's not forget that Redis was a collaborative effort built on the contributions of many, including those funded by big corporations: gcc/compilers, kernel, editors, VMs, etc. If the Redis authors, who were part of this collaborative ecosystem, decided to change their approach, it's their prerogative. However, it'…

I get that people get upset that their software of choice license is changed at the philosophical level. But I don’t get it at the economical level. When a project changes the license for a future version, the older versions are still available in the older open license right? So the contributions from collaborative effort is still usable under the same terms in those versions. So what’s this “bait and switch”? Licen…

As soon as there’s a security problem you have to update though.
Post reply on HN