4 ms·
Our use-case would be installing Redis with Disque on our servers (VPS) to run it for our own infrastructure. Job queues n such. Not sell it to other users as ”
by erikrothoff 8y ago
Our use-case would be installing Redis with Disque on our servers (VPS) to run it for our own infrastructure. Job queues n such. Not sell it to other users as ”hosted disque” etc. Is that a use case you are against too?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- antirez 8y agoNo the end goal is not to go against your use case, but as a side effect AGPL will actually remand even this use case to make the changes available.
- numbsafari 8y agoTo be clear, you are referring to changes to Disqueue code itself and not any code or service that communicates with with Disqueue via its APIs, or the configuration that I use when launching Disqueue (e.g. my disqueue.conf). Said another way, if I make a patch to the binary that I compile to, for example, fix a bug that isn't yet in upstream or to add a feature that isn't yet in upstream, I must make those changes available as per AGPL. Is that understanding correct?