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

Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

nginx.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 408 posts

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#391

Post by StudentStuff »

nvarsj wrote: post #364
tingol wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because your core business feature is done by someone else and you just take it and use it for your own profit without giving anything back. Do you need a definition of what scummy means?

No need to be rude. I know what scummy means. It's just not clear to me why this is considered scummy. Anyone is welcome to take the open source and benefit from it as long as they comply with the license. This is a very fundamental aspect of open source. A company invests money and engineers in building commercial tooling, which you then pay for because there is added value. You are not paying for the open source -…

Using someone else's work and making money on it without contributing anything back (code, funding) is morally wrong.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#392

Post by quickthrower2 »

sureaboutthis wrote: post #354
quickthrower2 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that lose is pronounced looze and loose is pronounced looce I can see why it’s confusing.

I learned how to spell it in early grade school--maybe eight years old--so I don't understand what's confusing about it but I'm an educated man.

It's confusing if you try to apply phonetics or any kind of logic to it, as an ESL person might, or many native speakers for that matter.

It is certainly not confusing it you learn it by rote and remember the rule. It is burned into my brain, but I see the mistake a lot so I assume it is hard to remember for some people. For me its vs. it's is something I still have to keep looking up.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#393

Post by apple4ever »

wolco wrote: post #130
coder543 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some of these "many ways"? because I strongly favor the quality of life under nginx over that of apache. For smaller projects, these days I reach for Caddy which is even more pleasant to use than nginx.

My personal reasons: - PHP under apache is faster - Small config files per site - .htaccess at the folder level when required I usually use both and serve php from apache and serve static content over nginx. Best of both worlds.

.htaccess is the thing I strongly dislike about Apache.

With nginx the config is centralized in a specific location. With Apache, configs are all over the place.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#394

Post by hannasanarion »

seunosewa wrote: post #295
sumoboy wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Got to feel lucky Oracle or IBM didn't buy them, definitely would have run them into the ground.

People thought Oracle would run MySQL into the ground, and that didn't happen.

That's because Oracle was too busy suing Java users and pissing on OpenSolaris. There's only so many open source projects a company can eradicate at a time.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#395

Post by sureaboutthis »

kayoone wrote: post #374
sureaboutthis wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned how to spell it in early grade school--maybe eight years old--so I don't understand what's confusing about it but I'm an educated man.

then maybe you should learn that a lot of HN readers are not native English speakers.

None of the people I've encountered--save one--ever came back to me saying they were not.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#396

Post by sureaboutthis »

quickthrower2 wrote: post #392
sureaboutthis wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned how to spell it in early grade school--maybe eight years old--so I don't understand what's confusing about it but I'm an educated man.

It's confusing if you try to apply phonetics or any kind of logic to it, as an ESL person might, or many native speakers for that matter. It is certainly not confusing it you learn it by rote and remember the rule. It is burned into my brain, but I see the mistake a lot so I assume it is hard to remember for some people. For me its vs. it's is something I still have to keep looking up.

Let's not let the minority become the rule. I have only had one person ever come back to me claiming they were a non-native English speaker when having made the mistake over many years of correcting people.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#397

Post by vasilia »

coder543 wrote: post #116
hcnews wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious, why not envoy ( https://www.envoyproxy.io/ )? Its open-source, used/supported by variety of companies, has more features than NGINX.

Envoy doesn't support static file serving: https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/issues/378 I'm sure that's not the only feature it's missing compared to nginx. Envoy is not very comparable to nginx, in my opinion... but I also wouldn't reach for varnish as an nginx alternative either.

Envoy is not the web server, it's load balancer. If you want to serve static files It will be better to use any other software. Furthermore, it is a very complex problem for HTTPS servers, because the Linux kernel doesn’t have full-featured TLS support for sendfile syscall. I implemented daemon which is used as in-memory storage for static files and client for our proprietary web server. Trust me :)

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#398

Post by sneak »

sjwright wrote: post #315
sneak wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the source is available, I absolutely can use the software—regardless of license. The only thing preventing me from doing so would be either criminal or civil law, and while IANAL, I don’t believe there are criminal penalties for license violations. The copyright holder would have to sue me, and prove that I violated the license, and then they might be able to get a court to force me to stop, pay them, or both. I…

Obviously you can use the software. Of course you'll probably get away with a license violation if you're not shouty about it. Similarly, I can use a pirated copy of Windows XP too, with effectively zero risk of getting caught. Nobody is suggesting that an AGPL licence violation would result in a criminal penalty, but if you got caught you may be forced to release any changes you made to the source code. And you coul…

The way you get forced is by someone filing a civil suit. My question was has anyone done that and been successful. It looks like the answer is yes, although it was settled out of court and not adjudicated. I am curious if a judge has ever found the AGPL to be a valid license constraint.

Personally, I find “you are licensed to use the software without releasing your modifications on your internet connected computer, however if you open a port and offer it as a service, you are not” to be entirely ridiculous. It seems to me that a license can’t (or at least shouldn’t) hinge on what other software I am or am not running on my computer (eg a webserver).

That is why I asked. I’m all for copyleft (despite the fact that its validity hinges on an inherent affirmation of the validity of the concept of intellectual property), but I passionately hate the AGPL because I think it is an unjust infringement upon my freedom as a user. It’s like saying “you have a license to use this software as long as you don’t run a browser that accesses porn on the same machine”. I think it oversteps the boundaries of copyright-as-designed.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#400

Post by OnlyRepliesToBS »

darksoul wrote: post #73
c0l0 wrote: post #49

I guess that signals it's time for nginx users to check out possible alternatives - just in case, if things turn out for the worse. I can recommend having a look at https://varnish-cache.org/ - while its performance might not be 100% up to par with nginx in some (very, very high-end) scenarios, it has many other fortes that nginx (at least in its FOSS release version; I've never used nginx plus) just cannot match in…

According to the public statements, F5 is committing to maintain the current level of resources NGINX has allocated to their open source programs, to keep the same dev team involved, to keep licensing as it currently is, not change any of the repositories on Mercurial and GitHub and to keep the NGINX brand. Which only means that NGINX will get even better over time.

delusion
Post reply on HN