131–140 of 338 posts
Fork in Linux foundation incoming. Minio will revert in 1-2 years, but too late, community will move on and never return, reputation lost forever
https://github.com/minio/minio/issues/13308#issuecomment-929...
https://github.com/minio/minio/discussions/13571#discussionc...
I haver not used it but will be likely a good minio alternative for people who want to run a server and don't use minio just as s3 client.
What a story. EOL the open source foundation of your commercial product, to which many people contributed, to turn it into a closed source "A-Ff*ing-I Store" .. seriously what the ...
What a story. EOL the open source foundation of your commercial product, to which many people contributed, to turn it into a closed source "A-Ff*ing-I Store" .. seriously what the ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still don't understand what the difference is. What is an AI Stor (e missing on purpose because that is how it is branded: https://www.min.io/product/aistor )
Might be because of this other storage product named that https://github.com/NVIDIA/aistore
What a story. EOL the open source foundation of your commercial product, to which many people contributed, to turn it into a closed source "A-Ff*ing-I Store" .. seriously what the ...
IANAL, of course
They have been removing features from the open source version for a while. The closest alternative seems to be RustFS. Has anyone tried it? I was waiting until they support site replication before switching.
I'd take a look at garage (didn't try seaweed yet).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think there would be an issue with removing AGPL contributed code. You can't force someone to distribute something they don't want to. IANAL, but I believe that what (all?) copyright in software is most concerned with is the active distribution of code -- not the removal of code. That said, if there was contributed AGPL code, they couldn't change the license on that part of the code w/o a CLA. AGPL also doesn…
> AGPL also doesn't necessarily mean you have to make the code publicly available, just available to those that you give the program to (I'm assuming AGPL is like the GPL in this regard). This is the crucial difference between the AGPL and the GPL: the AGPL requires you to make the code available to users for whom you run the code, as well as users you give the program to.
But, what I don't know is -- is there any other AGPL code that minio doesn't own, but that was otherwise contributed to minio? Because, presumably, they aren't actually giving their customers the minio program with an AGPL license, rather they have whatever their enterprise license agreement is. If this is the case, and there is AGPL code that's not owned by Minio, I can foresee problems in the future.
What a story. EOL the open source foundation of your commercial product, to which many people contributed, to turn it into a closed source "A-Ff*ing-I Store" .. seriously what the ...
Didn't contribute to MinIO, but if they accepted external contributions without making them sign a CLA, they cannot change the license without asking every external contributor for consent to the license change. As it is AGPL, they still have to provide the source code somewhere. IANAL, of course
Meanwhile, MinIO's own contributions and the distribution itself (outbound license) were AGPL licensed.
It's effectively a CLA, just a bit weaker, since they're still bound by the terms of Apache 2 vs. a full license assignment like most CLAs.