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

Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 245 posts

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#191

Post by avazhi »

fsckboy wrote: post #117
drcongo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That text is right there in the link, we don't need to read it twice.

> "we don't need to read it" [here] many people here don't read the articles, and that's not going to change. (on today's internet, jumping from the site you want to be on to a site with unknown UX patterns is fraught) but people here do read the comments, so having important details from the articles in comments here improves the quality of comments here, at least if you value staying on topic.

Why would somebody click a link to GitHub and then not read the text that very obviously pertains to the title of the submission they clicked on?

Also saying that GitHub has unknown UX patterns made me lol.

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#192

Post by whateveracct »

evertheylen wrote: post #180
whateveracct wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

doesn't it still work?

Yes! But I'm assuming it will prevent me from upgrading to Postgres 19 in the future.

I'm not familiar with the internals, but is backing up that coupled to Postgres version? That feels so brittle to me.

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#193

Post by drcongo »

stronglikedan wrote: post #102
drcongo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That text is right there in the link, we don't need to read it twice.

Why did you read it twice if you didn't need to? Seems unnecessary. I only read it once and just ignored it on subsequent encounters.

Trying to find what context was on LinkedIn but not in the posted link. Spoiler alert, there was none.

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#194

Post by whateveracct »

matkoniecz wrote: post #190
Aeolun wrote: post #127

Is it really that much effort to maintain something? I’ll admit I haven’t the foggiest, my most maintained thing having like 200 stars or something, but if I leave it alone for half a year it doesn’t suddenly combust into flame.

> Is it really that much effort to maintain something? yes see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47921198 for start

lol so a backup system was brittle enough that it needs a guy constantly working on it? which implies I need to constantly update?

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#195

Post by registeredcorn »

cornstalks wrote: post #170
rowanG077 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does sqlite not suffer from the same risk?

SQLite doesn’t depend on donations. They have a consortium, sell licenses (it is open source but some companies like the explicit CYA), sell support contracts, sell an aviation-grade test harness, and sell extensions. Of course there is always the risk it goes out of business like any other company, but it’s not funded like your typical small open source project and doesn’t even allow open contributions (not necessar…

Is there a reason why more OSS projects don't follow this model? It sounds like you are saying that there are clear advantages here that other OSS projects lack.

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#196

Post by qq66 »

registeredcorn wrote: post #195
cornstalks wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SQLite doesn’t depend on donations. They have a consortium, sell licenses (it is open source but some companies like the explicit CYA), sell support contracts, sell an aviation-grade test harness, and sell extensions. Of course there is always the risk it goes out of business like any other company, but it’s not funded like your typical small open source project and doesn’t even allow open contributions (not necessar…

Is there a reason why more OSS projects don't follow this model? It sounds like you are saying that there are clear advantages here that other OSS projects lack.

There are business models that work for the extraordinarily popular open source projects (Linux, SQLite, etc.) that don't work for the "well-used piece of infrastructure" projects, even though that category is very important in aggregate

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#197

Post by cornstalks »

registeredcorn wrote: post #195
cornstalks wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SQLite doesn’t depend on donations. They have a consortium, sell licenses (it is open source but some companies like the explicit CYA), sell support contracts, sell an aviation-grade test harness, and sell extensions. Of course there is always the risk it goes out of business like any other company, but it’s not funded like your typical small open source project and doesn’t even allow open contributions (not necessar…

Is there a reason why more OSS projects don't follow this model? It sounds like you are saying that there are clear advantages here that other OSS projects lack.

SQLite is arguably the most widely deployed database in the world. It also has its roots in government/defense contracting so it was built with navigating that kind of red tape in mind.

Most OSS projects simply don’t have that kind of weight or discipline to follow SQLite’s footsteps.

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#198

Post by vkou »

registeredcorn wrote: post #195
cornstalks wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SQLite doesn’t depend on donations. They have a consortium, sell licenses (it is open source but some companies like the explicit CYA), sell support contracts, sell an aviation-grade test harness, and sell extensions. Of course there is always the risk it goes out of business like any other company, but it’s not funded like your typical small open source project and doesn’t even allow open contributions (not necessar…

Is there a reason why more OSS projects don't follow this model? It sounds like you are saying that there are clear advantages here that other OSS projects lack.

Because at that point it's not a 'project', it is a full business.

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#199

Post by alexpadula »

cornstalks wrote: post #170
rowanG077 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does sqlite not suffer from the same risk?

SQLite doesn’t depend on donations. They have a consortium, sell licenses (it is open source but some companies like the explicit CYA), sell support contracts, sell an aviation-grade test harness, and sell extensions. Of course there is always the risk it goes out of business like any other company, but it’s not funded like your typical small open source project and doesn’t even allow open contributions (not necessar…

They don't make much off this, its known.

Re: Pgbackrest is no longer being maintained

#200

Post by Chris2048 »

2ndorderthought wrote: post #57
topham wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh. Bane of my existence is any service which does this. My org theoretically makes hundreds of millions, unfortunately none of that money is ours. So I get forced into a procurement process for anything that costs more than (ridiculously small limit), and get stuck using the worst in class because it's cheaper.

It would be great if github or someone did something to support licenses like this. So procurement was more like a cloud spend. Companies could put caps on the monthly spend for the projects they use. Organizations should be used to paying for products from individuals just like how they do from megacorporations.

Would a third party 'productising' FOSS be acceptable to the FOSS community?

for example, adding support, bug fixes, corp-friendly licencing and pricing models, private code/package repos, code/package signing, etc. Providing biz ppl to be available for meetings, legal protection, PII, etc.

To foster goodwill, they could even send some of the profit back to the original maintainer, ala pikapods: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31312682

Post reply on HN