Thanks for the clarification on Disque! I think AGPL (with a commercial dual-licensing option) is great for this kind of software ("you can provide hosting but you must contribute changes back").
Please note that the Redis license remains BSD. A few people misunderstood the @RedisLabs blog post. It applies only to modules developed at Redis Labs such as RediSearch. Modules developed by myself will be AGPL (that is, Disque). Redis core BSD as usually.
-
-
-
AGPL is the only way to stay inside the OSS realm. But I believe it's not going to completely fix the fundamental problem of OSS in the cloud era, that is, people producing the software are not always the same that will make most money selling the service.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
What's your personal thought on this commons clause? Do you think it could genuinely help reduce the alleged misuse of OSS in the cloud world or will it be just a stone throw in a lake, with little to no real effect? Genuinely asking because I'm curious of your opinion
-
Hello Matteo, I wrote a Twitter thread about that 1h ago or alike.
-
Oh wow I missed that. Thx
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I can't read the page because there's a non compliant privacy notice ahead of it, which is another reason I wouldn't use Redis anyway. This kind of licence manipulation just insults the intelligence of those that mind and is of no concern to users. Which is a shame.
-
To use Redis you have to go just to GitHub and http://Redis.io btw.
-
The reason for not using it as a product or platform is the confusion of licences, most especially Affero GPL.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I did get a sense of "did anyone actually read the page?" when seeing the criticism. I think this is a good move if it helps keep Redis Labs investing in the project. -
I read the page and tell you something, they could have saved a lot of bother by calling out the modules by name.
-
Agreed, they could have been clearer for sure.
-
Agreed about clarity. I expect they were myopic and should have used external help to craft the initial announcement. Kind of like when the developer solely writes the developer documentation.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The real problem here is that some "enterprise" features will be needed in redis in the future.
@RedisLabs will be to slow to adapt this by releasing them as oss. A fork will happen and you know the rest of the story, look at@MySQL and@mariadbThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
so it would be helpful to know which managed service offerings would be considered "out of compliance" with the new policies.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Bravo for the change. I agree current OSS licensing doesn't work in the cloud era. I hope it spurs on other organisations to come up with licenses that work.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The blog post is very vague. It's worded more like "let's stick it to the cloud giants" as opposed to saying "redis modules will be under a new license".
-
Which blog post is this? Don't see any mention of "license" on this page:https://redislabs.com/resources/blog/
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.