3 ms·
I think that this clears up questions about redis itself, but doesn't address the concern than future development will be focused on new modules rather than the
by radus 8y ago
I think that this clears up questions about redis itself, but doesn't address the concern than future development will be focused on new modules rather than the core - akin to Google Play Services vs. Android.
- chii 8y ago> doesn't address the concern than future development will be focused on new modules rather than the core which is a very valid thing to do, since dev costs money.
- radus 8y agoI'm not arguing that, and am personally not outraged by it, but in that context I do understand what seems to be a sense of betrayal on the part of OSS stalwarts, even as redis remains BSD licensed.
- marcinzm 8y agoThey have a right to do it but then they're making proprietary software and people who like open source software are free to not like/support them as a result.
- antirez 8y agoPersonally I'll keep working on the Redis core, plus the Disque module, that will be developed under the AGPL license (not Common Clause). So you can expect me to be focused on the core as usually.
- kawsper 8y agoIt makes me wonder if we would have ever received an open-source redis-cluster if it was developed today, and it makes me afraid that it won't stay open like today. InfluxDB moved their cluster implementation to their enterprise product behind an undisclosed amount of dollars if you want to self-host.