61–70 of 75 posts
I’m not in a rush to use a reimplementation of SQLite — particularly from startup bros that had a very public, one-sided, and unpleasant fight with SQLite over their contribution model. D. Richard Hipp is a genuinely fantastic human being, and SQLite is a project developed at literally the level of planetary infrastructure given how broadly and everywhere it appears. Forking his project while using the name to garner…
> We take our code of conduct seriously, and unlike SQLite, we do not substitute it with an unclear alternative. We strive to foster a community that values diversity, equity, and inclusion. We encourage others to speak up if they feel uncomfortable.
Sometime after the HN backlash[2], that paragraph was removed. Eventually, Turso released https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso without a code of conduct and hasn't had one since.
For me, the saddest part of the affair is that Richard Hipp and Glauber are both committed Christians. There should be no reason for envy, enmity, or memory games. But when business and money was on the table, it seems only one of them followed Jesus.
[1] https://github.com/tursodatabase/libsql/commit/3ac3ad263c0f0... https://web.archive.org/web/20221004144141/https://glauberco...
I’m not in a rush to use a reimplementation of SQLite — particularly from startup bros that had a very public, one-sided, and unpleasant fight with SQLite over their contribution model. D. Richard Hipp is a genuinely fantastic human being, and SQLite is a project developed at literally the level of planetary infrastructure given how broadly and everywhere it appears. Forking his project while using the name to garner…
One ugly thing I remember was the insinuation that SQLite was somehow immoral. Glauber Costa attacked SQLite[1] with lines like: > We take our code of conduct seriously, and unlike SQLite, we do not substitute it with an unclear alternative. We strive to foster a community that values diversity, equity, and inclusion. We encourage others to speak up if they feel uncomfortable. Sometime after the HN backlash[2], that…
I’m not in a rush to use a reimplementation of SQLite — particularly from startup bros that had a very public, one-sided, and unpleasant fight with SQLite over their contribution model. D. Richard Hipp is a genuinely fantastic human being, and SQLite is a project developed at literally the level of planetary infrastructure given how broadly and everywhere it appears. Forking his project while using the name to garner…
I get where you're coming from, but isnt the whole idea of open source "if you dont like the approach, you're free to fork the code and do it the way you think is right?" As long as the fork doesnt violate trademark (turso vs sqlite) it is working-as-intended? I, for one, encourage this kind of behavior. We should have more forks. More forks = more competition = better results for everyone. --- To make an analogy. Wo…
Plus, it's just technically bad. Most cases where you'd want to scale up sqlite are better served by a client/server database.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Forking his project while using the name The don't use the name. They use Turso. Even the HN title is wrong - the article title doesn't mention SQLite. They refer to SQLite, but how could you not if that's what you forked from, and that's what has the functionality you're changing. That would be a very weird article if we didn't have that context.
They state, plainly on their home page: “The next evolution of SQLite” That is a material misrepresentation and absolutely trading on the SQLite name
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tools don't always need to evolve though. I don't want my hammer to evolve into a screwdriver too, or vice-versa. Having separate tools for separate things makes sense when the things are different enough.
Yeah but this tool is evolving. You don't get a say on that, this is open source and devs do whatever they want with their time
"Tools evolve" isn't a use case. So what's the use case where you need concurrent writes for a database that isn't client-server?
I’m not in a rush to use a reimplementation of SQLite — particularly from startup bros that had a very public, one-sided, and unpleasant fight with SQLite over their contribution model. D. Richard Hipp is a genuinely fantastic human being, and SQLite is a project developed at literally the level of planetary infrastructure given how broadly and everywhere it appears. Forking his project while using the name to garner…
One ugly thing I remember was the insinuation that SQLite was somehow immoral. Glauber Costa attacked SQLite[1] with lines like: > We take our code of conduct seriously, and unlike SQLite, we do not substitute it with an unclear alternative. We strive to foster a community that values diversity, equity, and inclusion. We encourage others to speak up if they feel uncomfortable. Sometime after the HN backlash[2], that…
The charitable interpretation is that when people pointed this out, I have read it, and come to agree that the wording was too strong and not representative of what we wanted to convey. Therefore, it was taken down.
But why be charitable when one can just throw accusations around from the armchair towards people one barely knows ?
The one thing you are right about, is that I am failing to live up to the Lord. As much as I try, I keep falling short. It happens not only here but in all aspects of my life. If it wasn't for his grace I would be in Hell for sure.
While I understand that you could do this, I genuinely don't understand why. SQLite and Postgres/MySQL/etc. occupy different niches. If you need massive concurrent writes, surely that's what Postgres/MySQL/etc. is for? Their engines are built around that from the ground up. SQLite is built around a file that stores data for a single application, as opposed to being client-server with many clients. I've used it a ton…
> SQLite is built around a file that stores data for a single application A single application can need multiple concurrent writes
SQLite already supports lots of threads writing, they just all take turns. What application needs those writes to be concurrent?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One ugly thing I remember was the insinuation that SQLite was somehow immoral. Glauber Costa attacked SQLite[1] with lines like: > We take our code of conduct seriously, and unlike SQLite, we do not substitute it with an unclear alternative. We strive to foster a community that values diversity, equity, and inclusion. We encourage others to speak up if they feel uncomfortable. Sometime after the HN backlash[2], that…
What you are pointing to did happen. What you are forgetting to mention is that this was one phrase in a post that was otherwise singing their praises. The charitable interpretation is that when people pointed this out, I have read it, and come to agree that the wording was too strong and not representative of what we wanted to convey. Therefore, it was taken down. But why be charitable when one can just throw accusa…
Of course, you can take that — all of this — as an accusation. You can choose a narrative that's kinder towards you. The question I'd ask myself is if Jesus really wants to hear our storytelling, or if he wants to see us repent.
That said: on certain key aspects of life, I think you're at least closer to the Lord than I am. So Godspeed to you on your journey.
[1] https://github.com/tursodatabase/libsql/blob/3ac3ad263c0f092...
Don't forget that the SQLite team is working on their own multi-writer mode that blows BEGIN CONCURRENT' out of the water: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34434025 Though this stuff moves slowly (that announcement was almost 3 years ago!), so I'm glad to see Turso giving us options today.
Looks like that branch is still under actively development - seven new commits this month: https://sqlite.org/hctree/timeline