Re:Commons Clause
by mark_element on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @07:01PM
(#17814639)
I don't like the naming. "Apache 2.0 with commons clause" is not the right way to describe this licensing paradigm. It is fundamentally no longer Apache 2.0. I appreciate the motivation, but think it would better serve everyone to just make a new "Redis License" that describes the terms.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Commons Clause
by incompatible on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @10:56PM
(#17815919)
The name is kind of implying that it's somehow related to Creative Commons. I assume the latter organization actually has nothing to do with it?
Re:Commons Clause
by paulddraper on Wednesday August 22, 2018 @01:42AM
(#17816588)
Yeah... I'm interested to know why they picked they been.