3 ms·

For the record, this license is obviously incompatible with the Debian Free Software Guidelines; I suspect it is non-free enough to not even be shipped by Red H

• nijave 8y ago
  Curious about vendors like Red Hat as well. Seems like their umbrella support would conflict. Also curious about companies that might want to bundle Redis in their product
  • lwf 8y ago
    It'd need to be clearly marked — the promise we make in Debian ``main`` is quite strong: if you install it, you can use it for any purpose, modify it, share the changes with your neighbour, etc. And (although not explicitly codified, we touch on it in "must not contaminate"), you can install Debian on a system, install any package in ``main``, then clone the resulting disk and redistribute it as an image. This precludes having things like ``zfs`` in ``main``, as (last time I reviewed it), it was pretty clear that the resulting combined work was probably not redistributable. (N.B.: I'm on the team that maintains ftp-master.debian.org, and reviews all new software for DFSG-freeness, amongst other qualities)
  • sonarlunar 8y ago
    I don't think the Redis Labs modules were distributed via Linux package managers, no? I was under the impression you had to download them from github or something and install yourself. Redis, which is the whole confusion, has NOT had a license change so Debian and Redhat will continue to have its package as normal. So there's nothing to talk about regarding Debian or Redhat etc and it's all a confusion about Redis open source and specific Redis modules from Redis Labs that were not distributed via Debian or Redhat anyways.