Recent searches
Search options
@chrisg@fosstodon.org
@chrisg Damn, I completely missed this controverse.. Just yesterday I added caching to my (simple) web app. Guess I need to migrate to valkey this evening 
Thanks a lot for sharing!
@chrisg I like how bullying with money and corrupt laws are called "commercial acquisition" and "trademark violation". I'm glad they got called out eventually, and I hope they are ignored, they are paid to be intimidating and cold.
@chrisg Hmm, we really need a generic name for all the systems that are compatible with #Redis (up to the license change) that's not in danger of being sued out of existence by redis.com.
Fredis (Free REmote DIctionary Server) ?
Resdi (REmote Server for DIctionaries)?
ReDaS (REmote DAtastructure Server ?
???
@CGM I guess valkey-rs would work nicely. It's going to depend on how crates.io reacts to this
@chrisg I'm thinking of a more generic term that could encompass
valkey, keydb, dragonflydb, perhaps others.
@chrisg To clarify, I don't use Rust myself. I'm still on an older version of #redis which I use via ReTcl, a Tcl interface - https://code.ptrcrt.ch/retcl/doc/trunk/docs/index.html . I'm thinking it would be helpful for such interfaces to be able to specify their target in generic terms, e.g. "works with all ReDaS-standard servers".
@chrisg the thing that strikes me reading that thread with only a vague background of what's going on is how incredibly Corporate the redis posts come across. 'Strategy' 'release cadence' 'developing a plan and allocating resources accordingly' once you sound like that you're not the good guys anymore.
@yayroos I've been on the side that writes these posts using that language.
Sounding corporate is exactly what the intention is. Take the humanity out of the language and it gives the impression that you are against a formidable foe who is doing you a favor by not annihilating you.
It's not explicitly the point, and those writing it are not monsters, of course, but that's what the system is built to do. And it does it really really well.
@chrisg I know, i catch myself sounding the same at work sometimes too, but only with, well, not to phrase it like that, but, 'internal stakeholders' - I'm not external facing at all in my role anyway, but i only take that tone when someone else approaches me with it first. i know the individual writing like that doesn't mean much by it, but it's this subconscious act of removing your own humanity to lean on the entity you're speaking for, instead of lending that entity a real human face. it gives me the icks. especially anything that references actual human employees as 'resources' - I'm not a stack of minecraft ores or a piece of catan wheat, to be counted and traded and used up and neither is anyone else.