81–90 of 123 posts
The same article would apply to Terraform (and OpenTofu as the fork now), which was a much more clear "community doesn't want this" case. There were a few companies that provided a bit of hosted terraform services, but it was hardly at any significant scale. Yet the same thing happened: community doesn't want a restrictive license.
Big bad Redis Inc. won't let us host their software as a service anymore! Good thing AWS(champions of open-source software) are here to help! Seriously though, very duplicitous framing by AWS. Ignoring the clear existential threat to Redis's business if they allow other managed offerings to undercut their own.
Even if you're not affected by this license change because you aren't hosting Redis there is no reason to believe that you won't be on the chopping block for the next license change when Redis Inc.'s numbers must go up. The trust has been completely broken. You would be crazy to base your business on Redis now.
AWS and the Linux Foundation are the ones keeping the original Redis, the community project that existed before the business, alive for the benefit of everyone.
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…
[1] https://www.infoworld.com/article/3714688/the-bizarre-defens...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
But you are not forced to upgrade. You can just keep using the foss version indefinitely exactly the same way as before. That's the great benefit of foss, upstream changes can never force downstreams to do anything.
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'…
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'…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But you are not forced to upgrade. You can just keep using the foss version indefinitely exactly the same way as before. That's the great benefit of foss, upstream changes can never force downstreams to do anything.
Depends on the regulatory environment you work in. If you are in anything related to the financial industry, when CVEs are filed, you absolutely do have to upgrade to the version that doesn’t have them. The company I was working for at the time of the license change did three things. One, they initially forbid the new version to be used. Two, they recommended no new projects use redis. And then they negotiated a lice…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's interesting how Redis's decision is often defended while AWS and other 'big corps' are criticized. We in the same universe? I've seen nothing but Redis thrown to the wolves for daring to ask for money, at least around here anyway.
>I've seen nothing but Redis thrown to the wolves for daring to ask for money, Reducing it to purely "asking for money" is not what the criticism is about. The issue is the changing of licensing terms and not the money. Other open source projects that also have commercial paid products/services include SQLite, Bitwarden, TrueNAS, etc and yet there isn't endless arguments about those projects "asking for money" becaus…