Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

neflabs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 90 posts

Re: Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

#31

Post by deskamess »

rrdharan wrote: post #14
conradk wrote: post #4

It's amazing the lack of gratefulness some people have for open source devs. Matt Holt, which I don't know nor have ever met, has spend a tremendous amount of time developing Caddy and making it available for free. It's creating a lot of value, regardless of what you think of recent telemetry announcements. And still, apparently, some people will use the slightest disagreement to say that the whole project is garbage…

It's hard to imagine a productive forking discussion taking place on Caddy's forums directly. Certainly not in that announcement. At any rate having read this article I didn't see anything saying that "the whole project was garbage". The video (which Matt Holt removed) is also actually worth watching IMO, although I can see why he doesn't want it posted on the forum given its tone.

The video has a personality calling Matt an 'asshole'. That was unnecessary. Once that statement was made, I do not blame Matt for removing it. Name calling is not the way to go about addressing this important issue. It is indeed unfortunate that it has tainted what was otherwise a useful point of view.

Re: Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

#34

Post by stephenr »

Not surprised at all.

And for all the jibes people like to make when comparing things like apache to Caddy etc: guess which sole http/2 server passes all the spec tests?

Hint: it’s the one “that looks like a dinosaur” from 1995.

Re: Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

#35

Post by neflabs »

flarco wrote: post #15

Seems the OP lacks objectivity, especially with the religious reference. With that said, I agree that telemetry should not be on by default, but prompted.

We think his public statement, "Earning your trust is my most important interpersonal goal" is both relevant and good. We're not attacking his religion - we want Matt to stick to his publicly stated principles.

Re: Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

#36

Post by Vendan »

This is not the first contentious decision for caddy, and it does already have a fork: https://github.com/WedgeServer/wedge

On top of that, "fast, automatic TLS HTTP2 capable web server" is not some complex feat in Go. HTTP2 is already baked into the stdlib, and you can add automatic TLS via LE in a few lines of code: https://godoc.org/golang.org/x/crypto/acme/autocert.

A few alternatives:

https://github.com/labstack/armor

https://github.com/containous/traefik

Re: Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

#37

Post by neflabs »

mholt wrote: post #26

Hey everyone -- Matt here. Not quite sure why this is news; we've been discussing telemetry for a long[1] time[2]. I haven't actually watched the video because I've been really busy finishing my last semester of graduate school and switching research labs to start my masters thesis this week. Several of us in the research community have agreed that telemetry can be a net good for the Web. Similar to how Firefox, the…

Matt, your response here is a very nice advertisement for Caddy, and a glimpse into your academic life, but you aren't addressing the very real privacy concerns of your users.

Re: Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

#38

Post by cjcampbell »

mholt wrote: post #26

Hey everyone -- Matt here. Not quite sure why this is news; we've been discussing telemetry for a long[1] time[2]. I haven't actually watched the video because I've been really busy finishing my last semester of graduate school and switching research labs to start my masters thesis this week. Several of us in the research community have agreed that telemetry can be a net good for the Web. Similar to how Firefox, the…

I haven’t used Caddy myself and am not prepared to weigh in on the telemetry discussion, but I still think you deserve a thank you for such a sizeable contribution to the open source community!

Re: Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

#39

Post by mholt »

Touche wrote: post #5

I sort of agree with this post but not for the reasons given. That developer doesn't want a negative video posted to his forum is not a big problem to me. The reason I left Caddy was that it just didn't feel that stable to me. By that I don't mean that there are bugs, just that he keeps changing things. A web server is not something I want to have breaking changes all of the time. I want to deploy it and leave it alo…

When we get to 1.0, breaking changes won't happen on the same major version, so upgrading will be more reliable. :) Thanks for testing it out before 1.0 so we can get it right!

Re: Put a Fork in Caddy; It's Done

#40

Post by TimothyBJacobs »

josteink wrote: post #25
rrdharan wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skimming through that discussion, it seems like the developer is also somewhat naively optimistic and possibly underinformed regarding how much of his own and his customers/users' effort will be required to comply with the GDPR while gathering this data.

A server-installation data is not data about a particular user . It’s a information about a piece of running software. GDPR does not regulate information you can store about software components. It merely ensures that companies can only store information about people which the person has given explicit and implicit consent for, and that they can account for this consent. Log-data from a running service disconnected f…

It sounds like it is collecting User Agent strings which depending on who you ask is personal data.
Post reply on HN