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

Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 140 posts

Re: Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

#21

Post by armchairhacker »

tecleandor wrote: post #11

They still have linked their OpenCollective account, where they have raised $10K and still have a balance of $5K. [0] It's not a lot in the great scheme of things, but, have they been using a platform that's seemingly built for communities and open source to bootstrap their business? Because this is not a 'open core' situation. They just closed the repo and ran away. If they had that idea all along, I feel like it ha…

“Open core” is when part of the product is open-source and part is private.

Was a significant part of the product private before this announcement?

If not, someone can fork the repo and immediately launch a competitor (FOSS or paid). (Technically even if so, except it wouldn’t be immediate, and if they’d have to re-implement too much, it would be easier to start from scratch.)

Re: Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

#22

Post by jayofdoom »

More reason to run your infrastructure using open source software in your own datacenter. OpenStack has been around for closing in on two decades, running clouds and being mostly governance-drama-free.

It's not surprising that a proprietary ecosystem built on open source software locked up behind a gate doesn't make a worthwhile ecosystem for building open source tooling against.

Re: Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

#24

Post by watermelon0 »

strickjb9 wrote: post #18
matt_callmann wrote: post #4

What are the alternatives? I primarily used it for S3 and SQS emulation.

MinIO is a drop in replacement for S3. I plan on switching to this as soon as I can. For now, I just pinned localstack to 4.14.0

RustFS is a good and simple-to-usr alternative for MinIO.

Re: Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

#25

Post by hrmtst93837 »

jayofdoom wrote: post #22

More reason to run your infrastructure using open source software in your own datacenter. OpenStack has been around for closing in on two decades, running clouds and being mostly governance-drama-free. It's not surprising that a proprietary ecosystem built on open source software locked up behind a gate doesn't make a worthwhile ecosystem for building open source tooling against.

[flagged]

Re: Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

#27

Post by hungryhobbit »

tecleandor wrote: post #11

They still have linked their OpenCollective account, where they have raised $10K and still have a balance of $5K. [0] It's not a lot in the great scheme of things, but, have they been using a platform that's seemingly built for communities and open source to bootstrap their business? Because this is not a 'open core' situation. They just closed the repo and ran away. If they had that idea all along, I feel like it ha…

Wait, so a company shared their work with the public for however long, then decided to leave what was shared up ... but stop sharing ... and you're upset?!?

They did everything properly by the rules of OSS, decided it wasn't in their best interest to keep doing OSS, and left all their code available, as required by OSS. They were a textbook good participant.

Meanwhile, 99% of companies never open source anything: why aren't you complaining about how "unethical" they are?

Re: Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

#28

Post by jzelinskie »

An emulator for integration testing against the major cloud providers seems like it should:

1. be table-stakes for a SDK from the cloud providers themselves

2. have the obvious home in a foundation like the CNCF; how else could you be "cloud native" afterall?

Re: Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

#29

Post by kaelin »

zanecodes wrote: post #19
strickjb9 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MinIO is a drop in replacement for S3. I plan on switching to this as soon as I can. For now, I just pinned localstack to 4.14.0

>MinIO I have some bad news for you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47000041

It's comedic that they said that right after Minio pulled the same thing as localstack.

Re: Local Stack Archived their GitHub repo and requires an account to run

#30

Post by thefreeman »

armchairhacker wrote: post #21
tecleandor wrote: post #11

They still have linked their OpenCollective account, where they have raised $10K and still have a balance of $5K. [0] It's not a lot in the great scheme of things, but, have they been using a platform that's seemingly built for communities and open source to bootstrap their business? Because this is not a 'open core' situation. They just closed the repo and ran away. If they had that idea all along, I feel like it ha…

“Open core” is when part of the product is open-source and part is private. Was a significant part of the product private before this announcement? If not, someone can fork the repo and immediately launch a competitor (FOSS or paid). (Technically even if so, except it wouldn’t be immediate, and if they’d have to re-implement too much, it would be easier to start from scratch.)

yes, there were a large number of AWS products and features that were only available with a subscription
Post reply on HN