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

661–670 of 815 posts

Re: Redis is open source again

#661

Post by trgn »

lolinder wrote: post #615
trgn wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So what's really happening is that these FOSS companies want to have their cake and eat it too. talk about kicking down. So no harsh words about the big dogs who, while contributing nothing, and just due to sheer size and scale advantage, are capturing the lion's share of the enterprise value?

> contributing nothing This is a line that gets thrown around very casually, but every assessment I've heard says that the big dogs are quite prolific contributors to these projects. > capturing the lion's share of the enterprise value? Ah, here's the Matt Mullenweg logic creeping in again [0]! This is basically his taunt towards DHH (though at least you're using it to cry foul rather than tease!): "although he has i…

> big dogs are quite prolific contributors

ok sure, but there's contributing and contributing.

> a significant number of these companies have bought into the idea that they're a failure ...

ok, fair enough. But in that equilibrium you're painting, _only_ companies like AWS will ever be able to monetize open source, especially since software delivery and SAAS are essentially equivalent in 2025, and SAAS is a margin's play which small fry cannot compete with.

VC-funding is also the lever that allows for open source software to find deep and quick penetration in the industry. it's not aws driving it. So when a practitioner benefits from the mature tooling and such a wide userbase of say Redis or ElasticSearch, it is not only because it was cheap (open source), but also because it was lavishly supported (VC).

> I think most of this aggression towards cloud providers is actually coming from ...

I mean, you're certainly right about that, wouldn't call it aggression necessarily.

The software platform is different now than it was 20 years ago. If we want a thriving open source ecosystem, we will need a answer to the fact that big tech can hover up the spoils before the upstarts - that both spearhead the project _and_ fund its expansion - have a chance.

Re: Redis is open source again

#662

Post by fsckboy »

dharmab wrote: post #478
fsckboy wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

your comment is logically defective if that's your "good legal reason" to avoid the GPL, then it's just as much a "good legal reason" not to open source your work at all: if the GPL is not enforceable, that would mean you have used a non-copyleft license, which according to you is the thing you want to avoid for good legal reasons.

I didn't say you should avoid non-copyleft licenses? Indeed, all of my own OSS projects are non-copyleft.

loosely speaking:

you said "avoid gpl". reason? "unenforceable". eliminating gpl from consideration, thus you advocate non-copyleft licenses instead.

with me so far?

but gpl's "unenforceability" could only mean it turns into a non-copyleft license, one which you say one should not use, so if one shouldn't use gpl because in reality it is a non-copyleft license, then you must be against non-copyleft licenses.

just to state it again for clarity: "don't use gpl because copyleft is unenforceable so gpl is just MIT underneath, and I repeat, don't use it" is a recommendation not to use MIT license.

Re: Redis is open source again

#663

Post by em-bee »

eduction wrote: post #660
em-bee wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but my point is that if i just share everything, as a FOSS enthusiast is wont to do, then i don't need to worry about the details. the details only matter for those who are not into FOSS and are forced to comply with the license without having the desire to do so. one could argue that a complicated license reduces the attraction of my software, but again, if i am not out to become popular, i would not care about that…

> but my point is that if i just share everything, as a FOSS enthusiast is wont to do, then i don't need to worry about the details. That’s only true if you also don’t care what other people are required to do with your code. People who want copyleft enforced for their contributions will care if the license actually enforces it, and how. > if the license for my software is to complicated for you, tough luck Sure, fin…

but it isn't complicated for me as creator. i just share the whole thing.

and the difficulty to enforce i already addressed in my first comment: if you have to defend the license against an abuser then the AGPL is challenging. so i do accept that.

Re: Redis is open source again

#664

Post by xandrius »

txcwg002 wrote: post #78
benwilber0 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your company invested hundreds of engineering hours switching from Redis to a clean fork of Redis?

I believe it. There are companies that invested hundreds of engineering hours to rename master to main.

That is even more ridiculous, at least switching to a clean fork of Redis has business reasons. Following the latest cultural fads, less so.

Re: Redis is open source again

#665

Post by ocdtrekkie »

merb wrote: post #655
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be opposed to software freedom. The SSPL is a viral copyleft open source license, it merely requires users to open source things . The SSPL is only restrictive in the same way as the GPL is, it requires granting users software freedom.

The sspl is basically hostile to a certain user base, one could say it’s rassist. And that’s against the spirit of the fsf.

Racist against billionaires? C'mon.

Also, you're wrong. The FSF's position is basically that software that is non-free is immoral, so any license which forces additional software to be released with a free license is inherently moral. A very copyleft license like the SSPL should be the peak of the FSF's goals.

Re: Redis is open source again

#666

Post by kstrauser »

Orygin wrote: post #608
cdelsolar wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s amazing how much FUD there is over GPL/AGPL. I’ve seen at least 10 posts on this thread saying you have to open source your commercial software if you use the new Redis. I don’t know how there could be such a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the most common software licenses out there.

Even users of APGL sometimes are clueless about its reach. One example is minio which is AGPL now, and the dev regularly make false statements about the license on their github: https://github.com/minio/minio/issues/13308#issuecomment-929...

That's just embarrassing. Stop that, guy.

Re: Redis is open source again

#667

Post by roetlich »

_tom_ wrote: post #343

Doesn't AGPL give you LESS rights? (fewer?) AGPL is pretty much a non-starter for any commercial development. The RSALv2 let you use Redis, unless you were a service provider. Now, you can't use it for anything (EVERYTHING is accessed over a network now) without sharing your source. So, before everyone but amazon could use it for commercial purposes, now no one can.

Unless you modify Redis, what do you want to share? You don't have to share any of your server code or anything. No reason to be so dramatic. :)

Re: Redis is open source again

#668

Post by growse »

palata wrote: post #641
growse wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can't "copy anything". They can only copy what they're explicitly legally allowed to. Elastic explicitly allowed AWS to copy and use their source code, then whined about it.

I meant they have the resources to copy any product in a way that will crush the competition. As in, they can build an alternative to an open source project, offer it for free (i.e. at a loss) for years until they capture the market, and then start enshittifying. This is an antitrust problem. > Elastic explicitly allowed AWS to copy and use their source code, then whined about it. Yeah at the very least they should h…

Ah I see what you mean. Yes, agree. But that's orthogonal to OSS and like you say is a reg issue.

Re: Redis is open source again

#670

Post by motorest »

palata wrote: post #521
rank0 wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Whats the point of open source if you can't fork or sell hosted clusters? The problem here is that Amazon is in a position where they can fork and sell it for a loss in order to crush the competition. That would be the point of antitrust, I guess? I mean if regulations were actually enforced.

> The problem here is that Amazon is in a position where they can fork and sell it for a loss in order to crush the competition.

Everyone can fork any FLOSS project. That's by design. There are also no restrictions on random people selling services directly or indirectly using said FLOSS projects.

If a corporation changes their mind and decide it was a mistake for them to release software as FLOSS, they have the right to do what Redis just did. What they can't do is feign ignorance or do a bait-and-switch to try to coerce their userbase to cough up licensing fees for FLOSS projects.

Post reply on HN