Redis' Dual Licensing Model: A Disappointing Shift

Redis has become an essential tool for many within our industry, known for its efficiency in handling in-memory data structures. Its impact goes beyond just the developer community; numerous organizations heavily depend on Redis, incorporating it into their critical systems due to its commercial flexibility and reliability.

Redis originally used the BSD license for its core software, which is known for being very permissive and closely aligning with the principles of open-source software. The BSD license allows for nearly unrestricted use, modification, and distribution of the software, provided that all copies retain the original copyright notices and disclaimers. This made Redis an attractive option for developers and companies looking to leverage its capabilities within their own projects or services.

Recently, Redis announced a significant shift in this licensing model, moving to a dual source-available licensing model comprising the Redis Source Available License version 2 (RSALv2) and the Server Side Public License v1 (SSPLv1). This change was introduced to provide the Redis community with more "freedom and clarity" by releasing Redis Stack and Redis modules under these licenses. RSALv2 excludes commercialization of the software or its provision as a managed service, while SSPL aims at maintaining the open-source spirit by requiring any service-based use of the software to release modifications and management layers' source code under SSPL. This means that while developers and organizations can use, modify, and distribute the software under this license, they are not allowed to offer the Redis software as a part of a commercial managed service offering.

However, due to the inclusion of these restrictions, Redis effectively diverged from the Open Source Initiative's (OSI) definition of open-source software. Open-source software, according to OSI standards, allows for free use, modification, and distribution without significant restrictions.

The implications of adopting such a license are multifaceted:

1. Exclusion from Open Source Repositories and Distributions: Major Linux distributions and open-source repositories have strict guidelines about the software they include, often adhering to OSI definitions of open-source. The introduction of a non-OSI-approved license could lead to Redis being excluded from these platforms by default, as it no longer meets the criteria for open-source software. This exclusion could limit Redis' availability and usage among a broader audience that relies on these distributions for deploying open-source solutions.
2. Impact on Community Contributions: One of the core strengths of open-source software is the community that builds around it, contributing code, documentation, bug reports, and more. A shift away from a fully open-source model could alienate parts of this community, particularly those over 700 github project developers that contributed the time and code under the expectation that their work is part of a freely available and distributed project.
3. Partnerships and Integrations: Open-source projects often benefit from a network of partnerships and integrations with other projects, enhancing their functionality and utility. A licensing model that restricts certain uses or is not universally recognized as open-source could complicate these relationships. Partners may be hesitant to integrate with or build upon a project that does not meet the open-source definition, potentially isolating Redis from the broader ecosystem.
4. Long-term Sustainability and Growth: While the licensing change might be intended to protect Redis' commercial interests, particularly against large cloud providers repackaging and selling their software, it raises questions about the long-term sustainability and growth of the project. Balancing commercial interests with the ethos of open-source is challenging. A model that leans too far from open-source principles could hinder adoption, innovation, and community support in the long run.

There's hope in alternatives! In light of Redis' popularity, there are various Redis-compatible clones and alternatives available, offering different features, improved speed, and various optimizations. These alternatives cater to a wide range of needs, from those seeking more specialized features to those looking for solutions that might better align with specific infrastructure requirements. Exploring these options can provide valuable insights into the diverse ecosystem surrounding in-memory data management solutions, potentially revealing paths to enhanced performance, cost savings, scalability, and true open-source permissions that Redis alone may not offer. You can easily pull down most of those and test for yourself.

In essence, Redis' licensing evolution opens up a broader conversation about the future of true open-source software, balancing commercial success with a commitment to community and collaboration. It's a journey worth watching, as it will influence how we think about, contribute to, and use open-source software moving forward.

#Redis #OpenSource #TechCommunity #SoftwareLicensing #DataManagement #InMemoryDatabase #TechnologyTrends #CloudComputing #DevOps