New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove Commons Clause modules #984

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@vmbrasseur

vmbrasseur commented Sep 24, 2018

Hi, all. Vice President of the Open Source Initiative (OSI) here.

The Commons Clause, when applied to an OSI-approved license, creates a new license that violates the Open Source Definition (OSD). The OSI does not approve licenses that violate the OSD and does not approve of the Commons Clause in general. Therefore modules with licenses that include the Commons Clause are not OSI-approved.

As this page says it lists only OSI-approved licenses, I've removed the Commons Clause-using modules from the list so that the page is now accurate.

Remove Commons Clause modules
Hi, all. Vice President of the Open Source Initiative (OSI) here.

The Commons Clause, when applied to an OSI-approved license, creates a new license that violates the Open Source Definition (OSD). The OSI does not approve licenses that violate the OSD and does not approve of the Commons Clause in general. Therefore modules with licenses that include the Commons Clause are not OSI-approved.

As this page says it lists only OSI-approved licenses, I've removed the Commons Clause-using modules from the list so that the page is now accurate.
@antirez

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@antirez

antirez Sep 27, 2018

Owner

Hello, thanks @vmbrasseur, the current situation of the module page stating that only OSS modules are listed but instead reports the Common Clause modules is wrong indeed, however I don't think I'll remove the Redis Labs modules, I would like to rather find a way to enlist them as well, for two main reasons:

  1. They are the most notable modules in the Redis ecosystem.
  2. They could be seriously useful to Redis users, and are free as beer.

However how to change the policy is currently not clear, if to allow any commercial module to be listed or just "source available and free as beer" modules. However I plan to highlight such modules as non OSS modules.

Owner

antirez commented Sep 27, 2018

Hello, thanks @vmbrasseur, the current situation of the module page stating that only OSS modules are listed but instead reports the Common Clause modules is wrong indeed, however I don't think I'll remove the Redis Labs modules, I would like to rather find a way to enlist them as well, for two main reasons:

  1. They are the most notable modules in the Redis ecosystem.
  2. They could be seriously useful to Redis users, and are free as beer.

However how to change the policy is currently not clear, if to allow any commercial module to be listed or just "source available and free as beer" modules. However I plan to highlight such modules as non OSS modules.

@vmbrasseur

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@vmbrasseur

vmbrasseur Sep 27, 2018

Removing the "only OSI-approved" bit would accomplish the immediate goal, but I like your additional plan to flag the proprietary-licensed modules as non OSS modules.

Those two things would keep the popular modules on the list, make their licensing clear to potential users, and be accurate from an OSI point of view.

I'm happy to update my PR to do these two things instead, if you'd like?

vmbrasseur commented Sep 27, 2018

Removing the "only OSI-approved" bit would accomplish the immediate goal, but I like your additional plan to flag the proprietary-licensed modules as non OSS modules.

Those two things would keep the popular modules on the list, make their licensing clear to potential users, and be accurate from an OSI point of view.

I'm happy to update my PR to do these two things instead, if you'd like?

@SirCmpwn

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@SirCmpwn

SirCmpwn Oct 4, 2018

Hey @antirez, can you answer @vmbrasseur's questions? The current page is disengenous and should probably be quickly corrected.

SirCmpwn commented Oct 4, 2018

Hey @antirez, can you answer @vmbrasseur's questions? The current page is disengenous and should probably be quickly corrected.

@natoscott

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@natoscott

natoscott Oct 12, 2018

@vmbrasseur @antirez some of the Redis Labs' modules have been forked and are being maintained as open source software, it would be great if these could be mentioned on the modules page as well.

https://goodformcode.com/

natoscott commented Oct 12, 2018

@vmbrasseur @antirez some of the Redis Labs' modules have been forked and are being maintained as open source software, it would be great if these could be mentioned on the modules page as well.

https://goodformcode.com/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment