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

IBM nearing a buyout deal for HashiCorp, source says

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 185 posts

Re: IBM nearing a buyout deal for HashiCorp, source says

#131

Post by mdaniel »

andrenth wrote: post #130
nimbius wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please file in a calm and orderly fashion toward the exits and remember: IBM killed Centos for profit. Terraform users can pick up their new alternative here: https://opentofu.org/ and for those of you with Vault, you can find your new alternative here: https://openbao.org/

Is someone working on a Nomad fork?

I don't have any further insight, but looking at https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/forks?include=active&page...> coughed up https://github.com/atlassian/nomad/branches although confusingly it says "updated last week" but browsing any one of the branches seems to be stupid old so I got nothing

Finding conceptual forks, e.g. $(git push --mirror ...) would be trickier but I bet sourcegraph could do it

Ultimately, the question boils down to: what risk are you driving down: hitching your wagon to a dead stack, not getting security updates, not getting PRs merged, $other?

Re: IBM nearing a buyout deal for HashiCorp, source says

#134

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

fwungy wrote: post #85
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #3

I hope that's not true (or falls through). I have a good friend that works for HashiCorp. He's 42, and will undoubtedly be on the chopping block.

If he's on the tech side he should be fine. IBM is loaded with boomers with amazing jobs and pension plans that they're eager to dump if they can. They seem to want to keep good tech people while dumping the sweet deal boomers and non-tech where possible. t. IBMer

Thanks.

He's a really good guy, and an excellent, and enthusiastic tech. One of the better folks that I've had the privilege to work with.

The stories (and there's a lot of smoke) that I hear, coming from IBM, are not comforting.

Re: IBM nearing a buyout deal for HashiCorp, source says

#135

Post by growse »

dralley wrote: post #95
nimbius wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please file in a calm and orderly fashion toward the exits and remember: IBM killed Centos for profit. Terraform users can pick up their new alternative here: https://opentofu.org/ and for those of you with Vault, you can find your new alternative here: https://openbao.org/

>IBM killed Centos for profit The community is better off with the combination of AlmaLinux + CentOS Stream. AlmaLinux provides differentiation by supporting hardware and patches that Red Hat doesn't necessarily want to. CentOS Stream provides a way for all downstream distros (Red Hat, Alma, Oracle, Rocky, whatever) to contribute back to the ecosystem in a way that is deeper than submitting bug reports to bugzilla.re…

Wasn't the value of centos that it was bug-yor-bug compatible with RHEL but without the license fee requirement?

Re: IBM nearing a buyout deal for HashiCorp, source says

#137

Post by ThinkBeat »

arcbyte wrote: post #104
ThinkBeat wrote: post #88

It is hard to figure out what IBM is anymore and their profile /strategy is. They make totally awesome mainframes, which are spectacularly expensive and tends to be existing customers updating than new companies buying them. All the research and engineering that they put into the mainframes is astounding. They remain a critical part of a vast number of financial transactions in the world. I keep hoping companies will…

I've worked in a financial company running on mainframes. They were the least reliable part of the whole organization. The only reason they're still around is they've become hostages of the mainframe. My experience is that nobody actually likes the mainframe or respects it. They just tolerate it.

Being held hostage I can understand and see that point of view.

When it comes to IBM z/series not being reliable though that is certainly not my experience. Do you know which generation this was? Were they quite old?

Were there repeated hardware failures?

Operating system? program crashes?

Re: IBM nearing a buyout deal for HashiCorp, source says

#138

Post by dralley »

growse wrote: post #135
dralley wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>IBM killed Centos for profit The community is better off with the combination of AlmaLinux + CentOS Stream. AlmaLinux provides differentiation by supporting hardware and patches that Red Hat doesn't necessarily want to. CentOS Stream provides a way for all downstream distros (Red Hat, Alma, Oracle, Rocky, whatever) to contribute back to the ecosystem in a way that is deeper than submitting bug reports to bugzilla.re…

Wasn't the value of centos that it was bug-yor-bug compatible with RHEL but without the license fee requirement?

>bug-yor-bug compatible with RHEL

It was never quite that, but that was the theory.

The problem is because it was an exact clone of RHEL, it's somewhere between difficult and impossible to have a proper community around it. Like I said it kind of revolved around "file a bug to Red Hat, wait for someone to pick it up, and then wait more for it to be shipped, which will be months away at best and could be years if it's not a paying customer's priority"

Re: IBM nearing a buyout deal for HashiCorp, source says

#139

Post by Jhsto »

robotnikman wrote: post #43
sneed_chucker wrote: post #6

Wasn't on my bingo card, that's for sure. Say what you will about big blue, they repeatedly seem to know who to acquire in order to buy themselves another 10 years of relevance.

They are almost 100 years old which is an accomplishment. I wonder how many they have left. I bet a big chunk of that depends on companies still running AS/400 systems.

There was an interesting point in the recent Acquired podcast about Microsoft vs IBM. Supposedly IBM revenue only decreased after 2012 and Microsoft only passed it in revenue in 2015.

Re: IBM nearing a buyout deal for HashiCorp, source says

#140

Post by yencabulator »

dralley wrote: post #138
growse wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't the value of centos that it was bug-yor-bug compatible with RHEL but without the license fee requirement?

>bug-yor-bug compatible with RHEL It was never quite that, but that was the theory. The problem is because it was an exact clone of RHEL, it's somewhere between difficult and impossible to have a proper community around it. Like I said it kind of revolved around "file a bug to Red Hat, wait for someone to pick it up, and then wait more for it to be shipped, which will be months away at best and could be years if it's…

What I've seen people use CentOS for is testing a product intended to run on RHEL. For that, CentOS didn't need a separate community, and bugfixing at a pace different from RHEL would have been actively undesirable.
Post reply on HN