We Need to Talk About Redis.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ค. 2024
- Redis is no longer open source. On March 20th, Redis changed the official license for all future versions. That has serious consequences for the open source community and some companies providing managed Redis. We need to talk about it.
-- sources
antirez article: antirez.com/news/120
announcement: redis.com/blog/redis-adopts-d...
redis timeline: www.gomomento.com/blog/rip-re...
-- my links
newletter: www.joshtriedcoding.com/
discord: / discord
github: github.com/joschan21 - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![The Wall Song ร้องข้ามกำแพง | EP.202 | ตั้ม วราวุธ / เบสท์ คำสิงห์ | 18 ก.ค. 67 [1/5]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cwIoA7XHqnE/mqdefault.jpg)
![[TH] 2024 PMWC x EWC Group Stage Day 2 | PUBG MOBILE WORLD CUP x ESPORTS WORLD CUP](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vwIQyCmNIBU/mqdefault.jpg)
I feel like redis has lost it's key values :)
I anticipated a Dad joke
Let's wait until this joke expires 😂😂😂
@@santicomp it's still in-memory
We should
DEL users:jvanb231:jokes
@@napalm5 DEL users:jvanb231:jokes:1
Let's try and delete it 😄😃😄
The community fork is actually very likely. Just like it happened with Terraform.
I think the big problem with such projects is that all competitors are just using your company efforts to compete with your offering.
Terraform, Redis, Mongo and other.
@@khalilmohammadmirza4070 its not all the "company efforts" if you follow the timeline in the video. It entered opensource before any company existing and has taken community contributions all the long.
So what? This means only one thing - a better alternative will soon appear. "A holy place is never empty," remember this.
The current Redis would be forked.
Getting ready for the FOOOOOOOOOORKS. haha
Checkout KeyDB and DragonFly ;) Alternative are already there
This only applies to 3rd party redis service providers. You still can self host redis, just like before
New guys will do this too in the future
there's already a fork "redict" that keeps the original license
The pain of having Planetscale as the db and redis as the rate limiter 😄
redis can act as a rate limiter? Lookout NGINX, the cache layer is coming for you.
And thats kids, why you shouldn't watch Theo :)
@@markkkkas Theo couldn't have predicted either of those
@@andymorin9163 Theo never fails to fail even for unforeseeable situations
From what I gather, these changes seem to all be targeting SaaS companies that use services from Redis but don't contribute equally. If you want to self-host redis and use it that's still a completely free option. You just host and run it yourself instead of paying an SaaS company to do it for you. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Redis' new business model doesn't seem any different from Ubuntu or OpenSUSE. The gomomento article reads like a smear campaign and then paints AWS like a savior right at the end acting like they are heroes for forking a repo that went closed source cause the maintainer was tired of big companies taking advantage of open-source projects and not contributing back.
Yep. Josh is the intellectual he is - so that goes over his head. But nothing has changed for core tech projects and it’s interesting, that Redis held out that long as a legacy project. Getting Jeffed is a serious problem and it is good that this license change is coming; following the elastic search license legacy. When Redis was founded, that mess didn’t exist (AWS, GCP, Azure, Vercel etc steeling open source)
“big companies taking advantage of open-source projects and never contributing back” is exactly the deal you sign up for when you release a project with a permissive open source license. If you are expecting some kind of reciprocity or compensation, put it in the license. Redis is totally within its rights to relicense the project, but any users of Redis (including SaaS businesses) had no obligation to contribute back in any way
@@kylew5331the contribution is the main component of Open Source. Of course it didn't ask you to support with the money directly. If someone help you to grow your business, you should also help them back. It is the basic morality. Imagine if every developer needs to pay the subscription for every programming language/library/packages they use before even starting the project, that would be crazy. I wish many company to contribute back the open source projects to grow together.
@@kylew5331 random user name comments a posts from the vigilante arm chair here about open source and at another place about to small salaries - not contributing back and bankrupting the creators are two different things; a situation that did not exist when the “open source charter” was written. Watch Evans Cazaplicki’s talk (author of Elexir) on the “Economics of Programming Languages” / Open Source
…posts from the vigilante arm chair about open source and at another place desiring to getting payed more…. Great not contributing back and bankrupting the creators are two different things. A situation that luckily did not exist when the “open source charter” was written. There is a great speech by Evans Cazaplicki, the author of Elexir, on the -Economics of Programming Languages Open Source
Reminds me of the whole ElasticSearch fork to OpenSearch saga. Didn't turn out so good for the former.
Can you explain more?
@@johnpitbull354 I work for a company that used to use ElasticSearch and paid $$ for licensing. Then ES licencing changed and OS forked off it. We spent hundreds (probably thousands) of hours switching everything to OS and of course no longer pay ES a cent.
I can't imagine this sort of thing is good for their bottom line; we're a big company - you HAVE heard of it. Multiply that by some large number of other companies that have done the same thing.
It just means that the current version of Redis would be forked by the contributors. That may actually get popular (unlike MariaDB) since they would get backing from the competitors. They offered Antirez a job, asked him to transfer the rights, and then spit him out. I hope he got paid a huge amount of money.
I am really confused around whom to support.
I mean cloud companies are making huge bucks by providing these open source software as a service.
How will opensource sustain without funding??? If it does not sustain then we will be left with only proprietary software and that is not good
The problem with OSS is, the one who built it are the community, the Redis as a company are the same as AWS, they don't need to reward their community with anything, they only hold the IP. So when the Redis as the company rework their BSD licensing into dual licensing, it will only benefit the company.
Community fork will emerge from this last open source version, just like Jellyfin are fork from Emby, it will strive.
OSS doesn't require funding if capable users donate labor. That includes companies. There are lots of open source projects out there that operate with either minimal funding from donations - to pay for hosting costs or whatever, but not people - or none at all.
The way this had generally worked before open source projects tried to become businesses to be able to raise VC money was that the community - including sometimes companies, just look at Linux - would all work together to make things better for free. A volunteer effort. Making it necessary for OSS to be profitable goes against its ethos and ultimately makes things no longer open source eventually when the goal of profitability conflicts with that.
So what? That's what open source is.
Cloud companies make big bucks selling postgres and Linux too. Absolutely for free.
That's what open source has always been about. Putting something out there for other people's use without any obligations back.
@@DevynCairns Its actually a myth. Linux is funded by huge companies.
waiting for the fork names ... what do you guys think of bluedis ?
whodis?
redis backwards: sider! i like it!
Debis
redwas? or redwill
i dont know much about BSD but cant we take the code under bsd, rebrand it and make a redis competitor with it?
Isn’t this similar to MongoDB’s 2018 switch of open space license?
Did they have a CLA? Otherwise I don‘t think they have the authority to change the licensing as they don‘t have ownership of the community contributed code.
Would only really be applicable in the case of if it was gpl or mpl i mean permissive as it is they could sublicense they would just have to abide by the terms
A third path I see (the first two are: SaaS providers either forced to stop providing SaaS redis on cloud or forced to a partnership) is that someone (probably a coalition of the 700 open source developers or a coalition of the SaaS providers or both) fork redis into a new open source project and then continue maintaining this new fork and hence using it. This workaround happened earlier with node.js and is somehow being experimented after IBM source closed RHL where we started to see solutions that lead towards Alma Linux & Rockey Linux.
Ladies and Gentlemen.. I present to you, corporate greed!! They knew, KNEW going into this what they were doing. They created a dependent base, realized they can't effectively monetize open source (big surprise there), but they think they are worth some big dinero. Corporate greed!
Luckily, every version before this was BSD licensed. A better version will now come along from necessity. Bad idea, Redis. Actually, stupid move.
This is why I hate when people refer to the BSD License as more permissive then a GPL. By permissive you are meaning that with a BSD License, some one can come along and close things up. I have a number of times hear people who release their software under a BSD License get upset about someone re-licensing it. That is what the BSD License says you can do. If you want your code to stay Free and Open you should be using a GPL. Also beware that if you use software that is "more permissive", you might end up losing it to something like this. Companies want you to use a BSD License so they can swoop in and take it and not give you anything in return.
Also, for server software, use the AGPL.
Why not fork the BSD version pre-commercial and work from there with the contributors?
Thanks for opening excalidraw to me and teaching how to use it - is a great whiteboard tool! And of course thanks for the analysis of what is going on with Redis as well!
Wait, wait, who's preventing people from forking open source Redis code under BSD license, call it OpenREDIS or something in that fashion and running that? No need to be Redis partner or anything like that. No need to build new cache solutions, just use your fork in managed deployments.
"just use your fork in managed deployments bro"
Redis labs, while it has 500 employees, did not actually contribute to development after Antirez left and most of the dev work is done by third party contributors. So nothing, except they filed for a trademark for the name, and are currently filing for a broader trademark for basically the ability to use the word that needs to be fought in court
Okay so, someone should just fork the last BSD version and maintain and update that one under the same BSD license
xfree86.
see "redict" already
@@AmauryJacquotredict is LGPL but yes
@@AmauryJacquot Valkey seems to be the fork most will use so far. Linux foundation and major cloud providers are backing it now.
@@TheBasedShark indeed, my comment was based on 5s googling 😎
Doesn't the (alleged) better fork already exist with KeyDB?
It does, it took me just under an hour to switch my docker image in my docker compose from redis to keydb, the application still works fine, just clean or migrate the data directory of redis so keydb can do it's stuff (for me cleaning it was enough)
Vercel (NextJS) taking notes... JK :)
😂
great video. but why is upstash selling "Redis" which is not even Redis? is this legal ?
So the new licensing does not apply to versions released prior to the license change. They can't retroactively change the license on previous releases.
But can you use a version of Redis before this license change? Fork it from that point and develop it further from that point on under a different name?
Yup.
Hey josh, what programming languages do you know other than Javascript ?
Can the source code be used to create a new open source incarnation of the project? edit: nevermind you covered this, AWS and community options sound awesome. :) Great video.
The community fork of redis should be called "Open Redis"
So.. It changes nothing for the non-node, serverless, 2000 services in the stack developers.
Thank you for your summary. Excellent, brief, and simple.
At first I read "Reddit is no longer open-source" and I was like when the hell it was open-source in the first place 😂
Reddit was open source until 2017 which is when they switched to the current horrible design and in general just went to complete shit.
@@ketchup901 Hey, thanks for the information. I really didn't know this.
Ah yes! Back when you didn't need logins to view all content on the site. I stopped using it before it was bought out. I tried going back to it a few years back and I vomited in my mouth at how much had changed.
There’s already lots of forks like redict, dragonfly, KeyDB, Skytable
What about upstash?
To be fair: It's most of the time not the Open part of the license that most people care of but the Free. How many people really look at the source code to optimize it? For businesses the licesing costs are a big factor, it doesn' t matter if big or small. Its often a factor to use a software or not. The FOSS is a ideologigy that doesn't pay out for most programmers in a capitalistic economy. After Linux gained support in the server world many companies take the chance claim ownership and change the licenses to something that generates profit. I tell you, this is just the beginning...
Yeah but Redis labs does not actually contribute to the development of Redis (it has 500 employees but most of the development is done by third party contributors after Antirez left), so the open source fork is going to have more features. Snapchat's existing fork is five times faster in benchmarks for example
By contrast, Red Hat/Amazon/Bytedance etc can file a cease and desist letter against Redis for removing a BSD-3 license from a public repository since they are copyright holders, and prevent Redis from distributing their source code unless they remove all patches that have been contributed by them over the past years
So what Redis Labs actually has is just the trademark for the name
You did a great job explaining this. Thank you
Thanks for explaining it totally got the understanding of the situation.
This has been coming for a while. I saw it a mile away.
wtf is redis? maybe start there...
Just watched the NodeJS documentary and it was the same story
Fork the last BSD instance. Screw the company. Just rebrand it is Redis like.
This was really scummy for them to do. I hope this ends up with Redis being forked into a project that the community can continue to develop, leaving Redis (the company) to lose control over it. Similar to how Open Office lost to its fork, Libreoffice.
Cool. What is Redis?
In my opinion if one needs to use redis without having to do with cloud stuff, it can be used as last stable OSI, the branch 7.2
I think AWS actually HAVE TO stick to the BSD version and fork. It has multiple contracts with its partners and is a subject to some codes those partners enforce. Basically that Redis company can now become stinky because of such actions and there are some companies that will not take that lightly, because they monetize the reputation and don't want to get anywhere close to the stinky stuff. We'll see how that plays out.
P.S. If AWS sticks to the stinky stuff and you don't want to stick to them because of that, check out what Microsoft has. Oh and also check out IBM. You know, there is plenty of fish in the pond. Actually you might want to jump off anyway - some solutions are just superior than others.
I guess the license allows them to do this change, but if i were one of those developers who donated time to project I would be somewhat pissed. I wouldn't be if they just forked their own version of it and did not give all the optimizations to upstream, but hijacking the main project really annoys me for some reason. Hopefully there will be community version that multiple cloudoperators will support financially.
Looks like a time to find alternatives
Fork time 👍Nice video. Thanks
No reason. There're few drop in replacements like KeyDB(which is faster than Redis as well) and something way faster than KeyDB - Skytable(lack features but has potential).
Redis is basically hashmap with a HTTP API kek. It's not rocket science, it's not some innovative product
Not quite, it has support for a number of more advanced features, but I agree, its not so unique that its invincible.
I think its just that its been good enough and free so no one really bothered with competing, its hard to compete with free ;)
With this I am sure we will see alternatives popup, both forks of the last free version of redis, but also more separate projects that now see an opportunity to make headway specifically within the open source area.
The release notes for Redis 7.0 said it added 50 new commands. A hashmap only has only put/get/remove commands… 🤔
@@simonmassey8850 they need to add new features to make it look like it's a developing project (for investors), to the point they're trying to make some sort of a crippled DB out of it. for most use cases you need Redis as a fast in-memory cache for stateless/shared nothing workers (PHP or under k8s), the rest is just feature creep
5:50 This still counts as open source for average people. You can still see the source code. Thanks for the video
Not memory as a service but more of basic shared data structures as a service like centralized locks or key value stores or heaps.
OK, time for OpenRedizz Fork!
Was that a 2 days worth of coffee?
fork and rebrand? that is still ok.. right?
There is a new product Garnet that most likely will replace Redis
It’s a long weekend. Plenty of time to remove it from our stacks.
Aaaand the forks ar here: redict and valkey
Just like Oracle JDK gave rise to OpenJDK
This shows that while open source is a neat idea, when it comes to actually getting paid it doesn't really work - you have to go for a closed license to be able to earn money on software.
Honestly don't blame people for wanting to stop big tech leeches from making money off their hard work. There's a reason why licenses like "AGPL" are nicknamed "Amazon GPL".
@@larsc888 Yeh, Amazon and Google are the greatest beneficiaries of FOSS. If it wasn't for FOSS they would actually have to pay people to write software they needed for their operations.
why do you need to get paid for something like this. the amount of code is on the level of 2000s donation level tier. its wierd these big companies think their software needs a bajillion paid developers. the entire point of open source is its not a bajillion paid developers but a few open sources just scratching their itch. honestly at this point redis could just put the product in maintance mode.
@@phgamer4393 For me open source is developers shooting themselves in a foot. If companies like Google and Amazon didn't have Linux, all the open source databases, web servers, and so on they would actually need to pay developers good money to create and maintain software they needed. With open source they get everything for free without paying those developers a penny.
Redis first asked it employees to work for free, these greedy developers demand money
well, either Redis is going to become subject to an anti-trust lawsuit or the courts won't be watching.
8:23
"And in 2018, [the creator] transfers the IP and ownership over to the company"
Ahhh, okay. Here we go. I can already guess what's coming after this...
So in a couple of years we will get the news that Redis became a niche product, the fork has become popular and after a lot of financial struggles the company is sold to e.g. Microsoft.
Baicaly what redis does is same thing red hat did for centos before they changed their mind. I know this isn't ideal situation but it isn't disastrous as you say it is. You can self host either at home or if you have company you can use it there and you'll be fine.
I think this is a temporary annoyance because I am confident the community will just fork the project and then dump the original project.
What, what WTF is that cup of coffee
its horrendous as heck! 🤣🤣
Funny thing there, aren't there contributions to Redis under BSD? Sounds like they may be violating the original license...
time to fork it and call this version "Redux"
Companies becoming more and more money hungry to maintain margins. this is the coming recession.
They are trying to up maintain their shrinking profit margins and don't want to get lower salaries or layoff extra employees
It's not about hungry, you can sue whaever you want, but if you want make money out of their work, you should pay the share. You also don't work for free.
@@alexanderplavnik3186 No. This is a CHANGE. CHANGES have reasons.
If you see a man buying a gun after 30 years of not owning a gun, you don't go with "well he has the right to protect himself". you go with "why now".
They made people adopt the software with the hope that it remains as is. They didn't reveal any warning about this future. Are they EVIL? or are they in a tight spot?
There are already many good redis forks
joining the way of MariaDB (formerly MySQL, RIP)
that is an entire liter of coffee! 🤣🤣
Makes sense from a business point of view. I believe redis will come to agreements with the partners. I don't see huge impact here and if there is well there's always alternatives
Unless the contributors assigned their rights to Redis, they can object to the change in license. Redis cannot just change the license without their agreement.
Hustlers gonna hustle
From hustlers to grifters
Fork it! Fork it! Fork it!
There's already a lot of forks even years ago. Look at keydb.
Probably something someone would've said at Salem Witch Capture 😂
I feel something fishy about it. It like those people force him off the his src code and change it.
we gonna fork it it and call it disre
Tell me how even a maintainer can transfer the IP-rights to a company, without the consent of all the people who push into the project?
Well - nothing stops these other companies forking from the last open source licensed version, creating RUDIS and saying "F U" to Redis the company.
Can't they just fork the project and rename it ?
Why don't fork it and change the name to ... I don't know "sideR" and pretend like nothing happened? Like it was the case with node.js -> io.js ?
dragonfly db?
KeyDB and Skytable as well.
and good morning to you too . . .
Sounds like it's forking time.
This is a problem with the BSD license. As long as the contributors are properly credited then changing the license is ok. Want to be sure it stays open you go GPL or another "viral licence". You can only get away from a GPL licence if all contributors agree to relicense their code to the new license. It's times like these where its hard not to agree with Stallman.
Don't worry... look at what happened to terraform... there is now opentofu, a fork of terraform that is now under the linux foundation umbrella... Something similar will happen
I think it’s completely fair to not want AWS etc to profit from your work without giving back.
Maybe Fair, if most of the work was done by redis. But Theo showed that many of the commits are from people working for other companies (Oracle, tencent, alibaba). And changing the license without consent on those commits is very dubious
That’s very shortsighted and against the whole concept of open source. The idea of open source projects is that others can provide services how they want using that software, with no commercial obligation to the developers. Trying to control how others use it to make sure you get paid for anyone making money off it is extremely anti-open source. That’s like saying any web server running Linux now owes Ubuntu or whoever a monthly fee suddenly, just because some company bought out the “open source” project maintainers.
Free Software was not designed for any abstract silly notions of "fairness." Not at all. Free Software was born of Right-To-Repair notions. Study the GPL (Copyleft) and its history. That's well documented online. No "being logical" will explain anything about real life.@@Anco
The ostensible intent of the original copyright is to grow the user base and have more eyes on it, and encourage contributions that allows it to grow organically in the direction that it's users need. Invariably, as it always happens in the case of open source that goes closed source, or closed source that offers an open format (vis a vis docker) there will be a rough patch where the code based on the original license gets forked and an open community will be formed with original contributors and OSS Redis will be fine.
its open source. its not like they put much effort into it in the first place everyone contributed. like seriously the entire point of open source is not to create a bloated product that needs tons of work but to share in a common goal to solve a common problem and then release it.
Thanks for this very informative video!! For web creators on a budget, and concerned about such changes, this is much appreciated!
Yeah, this is just like someone buying out a Linux distro maintainer and making that distro commercial, instead. That wouldn’t affect Linux as a whole but it would change which distros are suitable for small developers.
@@aalvarez2914 No it isn't. Redis is still free to use for people's own personal software or even a company can still use Redis for their software. You just can't offer services to sell redis hosting.
I think some cloud provider will fork Redis.
All parties impacted by this, should fork it ASAP.
Good to know-- won't be recommending that any longer! Debugging stuff you can't recompile is a pain (and dev time is expensive)
can someone just fork this and maintain a free redis, or "freedis"
Listen. If I buy a fridge from a vegan, I don't expect them to tell me that I am now a vegan. If you've bought it, you own it and that also applies to software. Whatever the original author once felt, is completely irrelevant. But source code relicensing only affects future versions and if they currently have external contributors, they will be able to maintain it in the future as well. And if they didn't, then it's purely a commercial issue. I'm not in the open source business to prevent people from making money, but if I'm doing all the work, then I would also prefer that I got the money. Particularly if the code is BSD, since I have no rights to my competitors enhancements. It's one of the reasons why I prefer GPL; I have the advantage of the brand recognition and if someone wants to compete, then I get to benefit from their enhancements. So they always have to be better than me in order to stay in business and I think that's a good thing.
I dunno why the algorithm suggested this video to me, needed to look up what redis actually is and does.
Aha, a database (probably extremely cut down as a description, but I'll go with that for the time being), comparable to all the SQL flavors out there (probably not as accurate as well, but meh).
Conclusion: Not relevant for me, I don't (consciously) use anything using that.
But thanks for the news anyway.
I don't understand why everyone is making a big deal out of this. Reminds me of the elastic search issues years ago. Do you think it was ok for AWS to be charging good money for elastic search on-demand services, making good profit from it, and not funneling a single penny back to the actual elastic search developers? How is that fair?
Yeah, maybe you'll have to manage your own redis instances again, my god, the horror of typing "apt -y instal redis-server" at the prompt and modifying some config as necessary.
I don't know if the licenses are fair enough or actually that bad.
But actually I HATE SO MUCH the companies like Railway, Upstash, as well as the bigger ones like AWS, GCP, Azure, which makes money by preparing managed hosting of open source softwares and want all that most of their profit goes back to the mother company.
Even Redis itself is simple and easy to replicate but the reason is the same true of any other opensource projects.
Yes, this is always a risk if your business is depending on 3rd party software.
Greate video Josh
Are you consuming garlic before making the video?
Contributors = Employees (now)
0:05 that graph is useless without labels. you might as well not have shown it.
SurrealDB ftw 👏🏽