3 ms·

Not quite. Company can easily change license at any time. No string attached.

• osigurdson 1y ago
  I believe AGPL + time + contributors makes that very difficult. It also means that if you have a commercial product that uses Redis you need to open source your stuff though, so not net better imu. Please correct me if I am wrong.
  • gkbrk 1y ago
    Nope, looks like they still require a CLA for code contributions, which means they can release it under whatever license they want. https://github.com/redis/redis/blob/unstable/CONTRIBUTING.md https://github.com/redis/redis/blob/unstable/CONTRIBUTING.md
    • osigurdson 1y ago
      Hmmm. Yes, agree.
  • eikenberry 1y ago
    It all depends on if they have a CLA or not. Have CLA == continued easy rug pull, No CLA == rug pull gets harder over time.
  • cdelsolar 1y ago
    No, it doesn’t mean you need to open source your commercial product if it uses Redis. AGPLV3 doesn’t work like that. You need to open source your changes to Redis if you make any, and if your product is distributed through a network.
    • palata 1y ago
      > You need to open source your changes to Redis I am pretty sure that AGPL makes you distribute your changes to your users, not to Redis.
      • j1elo 1y ago
        Classic operator precedence confusion. The phrase is well written, though: You need (to open source) (your changes to Redis) I.e. "you need to open source [your changes (that you have made) to the Redis codebase]"
        • palata 1y ago
          Oh, got it now. Thanks!