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

Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

mailman.nginx.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 501 posts

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#391

Post by toast0 »

mcsniff wrote: post #389
doublerabbit wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't people use putty? I still use putty because it does what I need for it to do. No need to change just because MS has their own terminals application, which besides I far from trust.

You trust them to run the entire OS and every stack included in it, but not to make an ssh client?

There's trust in the security sense, which yeah, you're stuck with the whole deal.

But there's also trust in the rely on sense. Which at least I try to compartmentalize. I can trust Microsoft (or Google) to make an OS I can rely on to run other people's apps. If Microsoft or Google want to provide apps, they'll be evaluated as they are, not with a bias because the OS provider shipped them.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#392

Post by mldbk »

laxis96 wrote: post #319
ikt wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

next question: why are people still using putty

Because Windows does not have a good SSH implementation and PuTTY has always worked extremely well for me as a serial and SSH terminal (also, it starts up instantly and never crashed on me). Are there any better alternatives?

I used to use KiTTY, because it is more versatile.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#393

Post by colechristensen »

dual_dingo wrote: post #352
jupp0r wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could have stayed with HTTP/1.0 as well. Or Gopher.

Without HTTP/1.1 either the modern web would not have happened, or we would have 100% IPv6 adapation by now. The Host header was such a small but extremely impactful change. I believe that without HTTP/3, nothing much would change for the majority of users.

But also, the only thing in most of the organizations I've been in that was using anything other than HTTP 1.1 was the internet facing loadbalancer or cloudflare, and even then not always. Oh yeah we might get a tiny boost from using HTTP/2 or whatever, but it isn't even remotely near top of mind and won't make a meaningful impact to anyone. HTTP/1.1 is fine and if your software only used that for the next 30 years, you'd probably be fine. And that was the point of the original comment, nginx is software that could be in the "done with minor maintenance" category because it really doesn't need to change to continue being very useful.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#394

Post by eropple »

m_sahaf wrote: post #300
eropple wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For just blasting a config out, I'm sure there are tons of problems. But (and I have not been to your forums, because...the project just works for me, it's great!) I've had a lot of success having GPT4 do the first-pass translation from nginx to Caddy. It's not perfect, but I do also know how to write a Caddyfile myself, I'm just getting myself out of the line-by-line business.

You could've used the nginx-adapter and skip the faulty LLMs https://github.com/caddyserver/nginx-adapter

Thanks for the link! Maybe less thanks for the attitude, though--I'm well-versed in how these tools fail and nothing goes out the door without me evaluating it. (And, for my use cases? Generally pretty solid results, with failures being obvious ones that fail in my local and never even get to the deployed dev environment.)

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#395

Post by ndriscoll »

rtpg wrote: post #334
Gormo wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also this is kind of why everything is ever so slightly broken, IMHO. OTOH, things that update too often seem to be more than slightly broken on an ongoing basis, due to ill-advised design changes, new bugs and regressions, etc.

The problem with bug full updating software is usually that they don’t release changes fast enough, ironically. Apple routinely holds back changes for a .0 release for advertising reasons. This means that they routinely have big releases that break everything at once. Bugs could come from 4 or 5 different sets of changes. But if they spread out changes… bug sources would be way more easy to identify. And bug fix velo…

As a user, my problem is that I receive functional or design changes that I didn't want and that make the software worse for me. So I tend to avoid updates. e.g. the last time I updated Android was for that webp cve. Otherwise I just want it to stay the way it was when I bought it, not how some new product designer wants to make it to show their "impact". Especially when it's things like "we're going to silently uninstall your apps (Google) and/or delete your files (Apple) and add nag screens when you turn off our malware (Google again) or add ads (Microsoft)".

I do regularly install updates on my (Linux) desktop/laptop because guess what? It consistently works exactly the same afterward. Occasionally new formats like jxl images just start working everywhere or something. But otherwise it has just continued to work unchanging with no fanfare for the last decade or so. It's amazing to me how much higher quality in that way volunteer software is compared to commercial software.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#396

Post by datashaman »

Gormo wrote: post #129
ironmagma wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that scary when you remember there are some systems that haven't been significantly updated for decades (e.g. the Linux TTY interface). A lot of stuff can just coast indefinitely, you'll get quirks but people will find workarounds. Also this is kind of why everything is ever so slightly broken, IMHO.

> Also this is kind of why everything is ever so slightly broken, IMHO. OTOH, things that update too often seem to be more than slightly broken on an ongoing basis, due to ill-advised design changes, new bugs and regressions, etc.

If you want to move fast, you must accept that things break.

If you want things not to break, you must slow down.

It isn’t reasonable to ask for these two things at once:

* lots of change

* stability

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#397

Post by dystroy »

endofreach wrote: post #221
austinjp wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bump each letter in nginx and we get.... ohjoy!

Dude, please, just create a fork & explain the name. ohjoy sounds perfect and the meaning is brilliant. This must be it.

This might even look like enough a reason to spend the rest of their life maintaining it.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#398

Post by xcrunner529 »

whoknowsidont wrote: post #266
xcrunner529 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess a vulnerability doesn’t count unless it’s default lol. Just don’t make it default and you never have any responsibility nor does those who use it or use a vendor version that has added it in their product.

>I guess a vulnerability doesn’t count unless it’s default lol. It's still being tested. It's not complete. It's not released. It's not in the distribution. The amount of people that have this feature in the binary AND enabled is less than the amount of people that agree that this should be a CVE. CVE's are not for tracking bugs in unfinished features.

It IS in the code that anyone can compile to use or integrate in projects as is the OSS way. Splitting hairs because it’s not in the default binary is absurd. Guess all the extra FFMPEG compilation flags and such shouldn’t count either.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#399

Post by bandie91 »

anotherhue wrote: post #196
tiffanyh wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could take the Postgres naming approach. Ingress was forked; the Post fork version of Ingress was called "Post"gres. So maybe name this new project "PostX" (for Post + nginx). Though that might sound too similar to posix.

Go roman? nginxii ?

are we at the twelfth fork? :)

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#400

Post by arp242 »

WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #223
darkhorn wrote: post #142

I don't understand why some people use a Russian software! Especially in this age.

While I may share the general sentiment, there’s a freaking lot of “Russian software” out there which you may be knowingly or unknowingly use. There is JetBrains, for example. But there is also core-js which is a little polyfill library being used by like way more than half of high profile websites. Also written by a Russian national. If you excise all contributions by Russian nationals to PostgreSQL or the Linux ker…

I think being open source is important here; I don't care if you're German or Russian or Finnish or Chinese or what your governments policies are, as long as we can inspect what's going on. "Trust but verify".
Post reply on HN