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

MinIO repository is no longer maintained

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 397 posts

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#141

Post by nubinetwork »

dangus wrote: post #137
StopDisinfo910 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then doing a bait-and-switch FOSS is not a moral contract. People working for free owe nothing to no one. You got what's on the tin - the code is as open source once they stop as when they started. The underlying assumption of your message is that you are somehow entitled to their continued labour which is absolutely not the case.

This isn’t about people working for free. Nobody sensible is upset when a true FOSS “working for free” person hangs up their boots and calls it quits. The issue here is that these are commercial products that abuse the FOSS ideals to run a bait and switch. They look like they are open source in their growth phase then they rug pull when people start to depend on their underlying technology. The company still exists a…

> bait and switch

Is it really though? They're replacing one product with another, and the replacement comes with a free version.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#142

Post by antongribok »

PunchyHamster wrote: post #85
PhilippGille wrote: post #3

They point to AIStor as alternative. Other alternatives: https://github.com/deuxfleurs-org/garage https://github.com/rustfs/rustfs https://github.com/seaweedfs/seaweedfs https://github.com/supabase/storage https://github.com/scality/cloudserver https://github.com/ceph/ceph Among others

from my experiences rustfs have promise, supports a lot of features, even allows to bring your own secret/access keys (if you want to migrate without changing creds on clients) but it's very much still in-development; and they have already prepared for bait-and-switch in code ( https://github.com/rustfs/rustfs/blob/main/rustfs/src/licens... ) Ceph is closest feature wise to actual S3 feature-set wise but it's a lot t…

Not sure what you mean about Ceph wanting to be in a single rack.

I run Ceph at work. We have some clusters spanning 20 racks in a network fabric that has over 100 racks.

In a typical Leaf-Spine network architecture, you can easily have sub 100 microsecond network latency which would translate to sub millisecond Ceph latencies.

We have one site that is Leaf-Spine-SuperSpine, and the difference in network latency is barely measurable between machines in the same network pod and between different network pods.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#143

Post by rofrol »

direwolf20 wrote: post #113
devsda wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is quick to assert rights granted by the license terms and fast to say the authors should have chosen a better license from the start in case the license doesnt fit the current situation. License terms don't end there. There is a no warranty clause too in almost every open source license and it is as important as the other parts of the license. There is no promise or guarantees for updates or future versions…

They're not saying they violated the license, they're saying they're assholes. It may not be illegal to say you'll do something for free and then not do it, but it's assholish, especially if you said it to gain customers.

They gave code for free, under open source, but you call them assholes if they do not release more code for free. So who is the asshole here? You or them?

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#144

Post by Nextgrid »

olalonde wrote: post #118
egorfine wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That means that any project without the letters "AI" in the name is dead in the eyes of investors. Even plain terminals are now "agentic orchestrators": https://www.warp.dev

Are investors really that gullible? Whenever I see "AI" slapped onto an obviously non-AI product, it's an instant red flag to me.

As long as there's at least one gullible in the pack, all the other ones will behave the same because they now know there's one idiot that will happily hold the bag when it comes crashing down. They're all banking on passing the bag onto someone else before the crash.

A Ponzi can be a good investment too (for a certain definition of "good") as long as you get out before it collapses. The whole tech market right now is a big Ponzi with everyone hoping to get out before it crashes. Worse, dissent risks crashing it early so no talks of AI limitations or the lack of actual, sustainable productivity improvements are allowed, even if those concerns do absolutely happen behind closed doors.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#145

Post by rofrol »

hirako2000 wrote: post #111
puszczyk wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just be honest since the start While I agree with the sentiment, keep in mind that circumstances change over the years. What made sense (and what you've believed in) a few years ago may be different now. This is especially true when it comes to business models.

When your product entered mainstream with integration that would yield millions when virtually obliged to get a license is typically what happens. When backed by a company there is an ethical obligation to keep, at least maintenance. Of course legally they can do what they wish. It isn't unfair to call it bad practice.

There is no ethical obligation. You just want them to release new work under open source licence.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#146

Post by skeledrew »

direwolf20 wrote: post #113
devsda wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is quick to assert rights granted by the license terms and fast to say the authors should have chosen a better license from the start in case the license doesnt fit the current situation. License terms don't end there. There is a no warranty clause too in almost every open source license and it is as important as the other parts of the license. There is no promise or guarantees for updates or future versions…

They're not saying they violated the license, they're saying they're assholes. It may not be illegal to say you'll do something for free and then not do it, but it's assholish, especially if you said it to gain customers.

There's no broken promise though. It's the users who decide+assume, on their own going in, that X project is good for their needs and they'll have access to future versions in a way they're comfortable with. The developers just go along with the decision+assumption, and may choose to break it at any point. They'd only be assholes if they'd explicitly promised the project would unconditionally remain Y for perpetuity, which is a bs promise nobody should listen to, cuz life.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#147

Post by antongribok »

lima wrote: post #82
merpkz wrote: post #9

I just bit the bullet last week and figured we are going to migrate our self hosted minio servers to ceph instead. So far 3 server ceph cluster has been setup with cephadm and last minio server is currently mirroring its ~120TB buckets to new cluster with a whopping 420MB/s - should finish any day now. The complexity of ceph and it's cluster nature of course if a bit scary at first compared to minio - a single Go bin…

It's complex, but Ceph's storage and consensus layer is battle-tested and a much more solid foundation for serious use. Just make sure that your nodes don't run full!

Make sure you have solid Linux system monitoring in general. About 50% of running Ceph successfully at scale is just basic, solid system monitoring and alerting.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#148

Post by sshine »

bojangleslover wrote: post #55
muragekibicho wrote: post #18

I ran a moderately large opensource service and my chronic back pain was cured the day I stopped maintaining the project. Working for free is not fun. Having a paid offering with a free community version is not fun. Ultimately, dealing with people who don't pay for your product is not fun. I learnt this the hard way and I guess the MinIO team learnt this as well.

Completely different situations. None of the MinIO team worked for free. MinIO is a COSS company (commercial open source software). They give a basic version of it away for free hoping that some people, usually at companies, will want to pay for the premium features. MinIO going closed source is a business decision and there is nothing wrong with that. I highly recommend SeaweedFS. I used it in production for a long…

Wasabi looks like a service.

Any recommendation for an in-cluster alternative in production?

Is that SeaweedFS?

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#149

Post by devsda »

direwolf20 wrote: post #113
devsda wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is quick to assert rights granted by the license terms and fast to say the authors should have chosen a better license from the start in case the license doesnt fit the current situation. License terms don't end there. There is a no warranty clause too in almost every open source license and it is as important as the other parts of the license. There is no promise or guarantees for updates or future versions…

They're not saying they violated the license, they're saying they're assholes. It may not be illegal to say you'll do something for free and then not do it, but it's assholish, especially if you said it to gain customers.

> say you'll do something for free

I think this is where the problem/misunderstanding is. There's no "I will do/release" in OSS unless promised explicitly. Every single release/version is "I released this version. You are free to use it". There is no implied promise for future versions.

Released software is not clawed back. Everyone is free to modify(per license) and/or use the released versions as long as they please.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#150

Post by ElDji »

I successfully migrated from MinIO to Ceph, which I highly recommend. Along the way, I tested SeaweedFS, which looked promising. However, I ran into a strange bug, and after diagnosing it with the help of Claude, I realized the codebase was vibe-coded and riddled with a staggering number of structural errors. In my opinion, SeaweedFS should absolutely not be used for anything beyond testing — otherwise you're almost certain to lose data.
Post reply on HN