Now to find Vault alternatives.
IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
71–80 of 391 posts
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#72Although I think they have very different use cases this means IBM own both Ansible and Terraform, both claiming to be IaC
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#73Hashi never sold me on the integration of their products, which was my primary issue with not selecting them. Each is independently useful, and there is no nudge to combine them for a 1+1=3 feature set. Kubernetes was the chasm. Owning the computing platform is the core of utilizing Vault and integrating it. The primary issue was that there was never a "One Click" way to create an environment using Vagarent, Packer,…
I was an extremely early user and owner of a very large-scale Vault deployment on Kubernetes. Worked with a few of their sales engineers closely on it - was always told early on that although they supported vault on kubernetes via a helm chart, they did not recommend using it on anything but EC2 instances (because of "security" which never really made sense their reasoning). During every meeting and conference I'd ask about Kubernetes support, gave many suggestions, feedback, showed the problems we encountered - don't know if the rep was blowing smoke up my ass but a few times he told me that we were doing things they hadn't thought of yet.
Fast forward several years, I saw a little while ago that they don't recommend the only method of vault running on EC2, fully support kubernetes, and I saw several of my ideas/feedback listed almost verbatim in the documentation I saw (note, I am not accusing them of plagiarism - these were very obvious complaints that I'm sure I wasn't the only one raising after a while).
It always surprised me how these conversations went. "Well we don't really recommend kubernetes so we won't support (feature)."
Me: "Well the majority of your customers will want to use it this way, so....."
Just was a very frustrating process, and a frustrating product - I love what it does, but there are an unbelievable amount of footguns laden in the enterprise version, not to mention it has a way of worming itself irrevocably into your infrastructure, and due to extremely weird/obfuscated pricing models I'm fairly certain people are waking up to surprise bills nowadays. They also rug pulled some OSS features, particularly MFA login, which kind of pissed me off. The product (in my view) is pretty much worthless to a company without that.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#74Hashi never sold me on the integration of their products, which was my primary issue with not selecting them. Each is independently useful, and there is no nudge to combine them for a 1+1=3 feature set. Kubernetes was the chasm. Owning the computing platform is the core of utilizing Vault and integrating it. The primary issue was that there was never a "One Click" way to create an environment using Vagarent, Packer,…
We really need a 2.0 version that actually delivers the promise these tools never reached because legacy decisions
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#75Based on what happened to RedHat/CentOS. i hope there'll be some forks like Rocky Linux on all HashiCorp's products.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#76Well, it was nice while it lasted! HashiCorp always felt like a company made by actual engineers, not "bean counters". Now it will just be another cog in the IBM machine, slowly grinding it down, removing everything attractive, just like RedHat and CentOS. Hopefully this will create a new wave off innovation, and someone will create something to replace the monopoly on IaC that IBM now owns.
Honestly, Mitchell should still be very proud of what he built and the legacy of Hashicorp. Sure, the corp has taken a different direction lately but thanks to the licenses of the Hashicorp family of software, it's almost entirely available for forking and re-homing by the community that helped build it up to this point. E.g. opentofu and openbao. I'm sure other projects may follow and the legacy will endure, minus (or maybe not, you never know) contributions from the company they built to try to monetize and support that vision.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#77Terrible news. New startups should be buying IBM. Not the other way around.
Like how Google bought Doubleclick and definitely not the other way around?
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
This type of comment appears here every time the name IBM shows up, but it is more symptomatic, of the bubble a part of HN lives on. Think every core IT infra of most of the developed world countries, most of the ebanking and core messaging infra of your large banks and insurance companies, plus billions per year in consulting services revenue. https://www.ibm.com/products https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IBM_pr…
a lot of banks still use the main frame. IBM got out of pc/server game but not the main frame. IBM is a big player in that game.
Airlines, as well. COBOL is still running business and flight critical services.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#79I expected this when the terraform license changed. Not IBM specifically but it was obvious they weren't interested/ able to continue with their founding vision.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering IBM sided with the fork, I suspect it'll be reverted for most or all of Hashicorp's projects.
I bet they'll organize it under Red Hat, and Red Hat will apply their open source policy to it, and that will involve reverting to OSI approved licenses
That doesn’t seem like what’s happening from first appearances. Looks like it’ll remain separate for now which means no RH influence to fix the licensing boondoggle.