Let the forking ensue. What a stupid move. They have illegally removed the BSD headers from contributions by various cloud vendors like Redhat and Amazon. I hope they can all get together to.maintain a fork, and maybe sue Redis Inc. for this unlawful infringment of there copyrights.
truly a bizarre way of doing a dumb thing - they do not own the copyright of all the Redis code, so they cannot "change the license" of the existing code at all.<p>instead, they need to license <i>their</i> new contributions under the new license, which will effectively make the combined blob of code only available under the new license.<p>doesn't change what they're doing, but it's just disrespectful, incorrect and a breach of everyone else's copyright to remove the existing license and headers.
[dupe] (<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39772562">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39772562</a>)<p>A more recent development of interest:<p><i>Redict is an independent, copyleft fork of Redis</i><p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39789986">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39789986</a>
I haven't read this license but I wished they had at least gone with the BASL.
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Source_License" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Source_License</a><p>IANAL, but AFAICT the BASL is not open-source, but it is _eventually_-open-source is in the source will automatically transition to being open source (GPL v2 or compatible... not sure if either BSD or AGPL work).<p>But if you are going to go source available, license proliferation is still a problem, please try to maintain sanity.
At least one community fork (redict) has already been announced:<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39789986">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39789986</a><p>I hope the community doesn't fracture too much and that at least one of possibly many forks gets enough momentum to be long-term sustainable.
I am building a major open-source package around redis.<p>This kills it.<p>AGPL, I could go with. AGPL/proprietary dual licensing works well. There's an open ecosystem and a closed one.<p>Non-free is a non-starter. It's no longer GPL-compatible. EVERY project under the GPL using redis now has a potential legal liability from (what's looking like) a sleazeball company.<p>Now I need to figure out if I should move to a fork or switch to a different package. Fortunately, I have a nice key-value store abstraction, so it's easy to switch.<p>I expect distributions like Debian, and Ubuntu by proxy, will move away from having a redis .deb as well.<p>The damnable thing here is the dishonest copy: "In practice, nothing changes for the Redis developer community who will continue to enjoy permissive licensing under the dual license."