• Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
    0·
    15 days ago

    Redis is also on the list, but not Valkey. Gitea is on the list, but not Forgejo. Still nice to see governments endorsing the open-source-ish software they know and FOSS principles, though!

    • Tja@programming.devEnglish
      0·
      14 days ago

      To be fair, I know redis and gitea (barely, gitlab is way more popular) and not the other two. Enterprise support and name recognition are quite important for government usage.

      • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
        0·
        14 days ago

        Valkey was created recently as Redis changed their license, having clauses which made the user choose between being “discriminatory against users of the software that use proprietary software within their stack, as the license requires the open-sourcing of every part interacting with the service, which under these circumstances might not be possible” or being non-commercial. Forgejo was created when Gitea decided to go the JetBrains route a few years ago. It’s since absorbed Gitea’s clout.

          • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
            0·
            14 days ago

            Yeah, and you have to pay for that. Lots of open source software have enterprise support and usage limit licenses but having to pay for something isn’t open source. I am personally ambivalent at non-commercial licenses but I agree that the restriction against using proprietary software with Redis in commercial usage is kinda bad.

            • Tja@programming.devEnglish
              0·
              14 days ago

              Of course you have to pay for a commercial license, it’s in the name. Development, tooling, support, etc, all costs money.

              I like the distinction. If you want to profit from open source, make your code open source. If not, pay up.

              • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
                0·
                2 days ago

                Sorry, I didn’t see the notification for some reason. The SSPL would prohibit people from running Redis from Windows, as Windows is proprietary. That forces them to use the source-available RSAL.

                • Tja@programming.devEnglish
                  0·
                  2 days ago

                  I don’t think that’s correct. It maybe prohibits people from building a service to offer redis to third parties on Windows, but you can run redis in your stack on whatever OS you want, as long as what you are building is not “redis as a service”. So any end-user SaaS that just uses redis as a cache is not bound to section 13.

                  And even if you built a redis as a service, the operating system is not explicitly mentioned in the license, so it would be for a lawyer to say whether that’s required…