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

MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 585 posts

Re: MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

#201

Post by atemerev »

canto wrote: post #199

It's absolutely stunning that people actually defend this behaviour! The community is having an outrage - and rightfully so - about a silently discontinued artifact delivery at a very critical time. Which is their opinion and every human being is entitled to have their own opinion and state it openly. It is also perfectly fine to expect a standardised behaviour to continue. However, what is most important is that is…

I don't understand the point. The entire raison d'être of this project is that you self-host it and don't pay money for S3 and control your supply chain.

If you are denied this possibility — it is much easier just to use S3.

Re: MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

#202

Post by tomhow »

jraph wrote: post #49

The title of the HN submission might look a bit misleading. It's easy to misinterpret it and think MinIO stops being open source (which would be a bigger deal IMHO). I think this would be better: "MinIO stops distributing free Docker images" --- See also the relevant README section: https://github.com/minio/minio?tab=readme-ov-file#source-onl...

OK, we updated the title to your suggested one now.

Re: MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

#204

Post by barnabee »

weli wrote: post #76
arghwhat wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is absolutely nothing malicious or suspicious about deciding not to provide docker images or binaries. Doing so does not hide or guard you against CVE's, which are entirely unrelated to such optional processes. Building minio is not only trivial, but is standard procedure - the latest release is in my distributions standard package repo, and they would not use prebuilt binaries. If you want that dockerized, the…

> There is absolutely nothing malicious or suspicious about deciding not to provide docker images or binaries. Doing so does not hide or guard you against CVE's, which are entirely unrelated to such optional processes. Agree. But that's not my point. If you start an oss project from scratch and you don't want to provide builds that's fine. If you start your oss project, provide public docker images since the beginnin…

It’s irresponsible to use open source software, be it a docker image or the application itself, if you’re not willing to maintain it or replace it yourself at short notice if what the maintainer is willing to do/publish no longer meets your needs.

Don’t like it? Stop being a parasite and pay someone for a support contract.

Re: MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

#205

Post by braza »

Tepix wrote: post #12

It's an Open Source project - I don't understand what people are complaining about. Noone is entitled to receive free Docker images. I'm sure if there is enough demand, someone else who is trustworthy will step up and automate building them. What I'd like to complain about instead is the pricing page on the Min.io webpage - it doesn't list any pricing. Looking at https://cloudian.com/blog/minios-ui-removal-leaves-org…

> I don't understand what people are complaining about. Noone is entitled to receive free Docker images.

Every time I read something like this, I recall this post from Rich Hickey[1][2] on why no one is entitled to benefit from another human being's goodwill and time.

From the post:

> The only people entitled to say how open source 'ought' to work are people who run projects, and the scope of their entitlement extends only to their own projects.

> Just because someone open sources something does not imply they owe the world a change in their status, focus and effort, e.g. from inventor to community manager.

[1] - https://gist.github.com/richhickey/1563cddea1002958f96e7ba95....

[2] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18538123

Re: MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

#206

Post by _cenw »

SteveNuts wrote: post #175
jamespo wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With 100PB clusters being built and not a cent going to them, you can see why minio has gone this route. I wonder if they will be "valkeyed"? Not by AWS presumably.

> I wonder if they will be "valkeyed"? Not by AWS presumably Almost certainly not, due to the AGPL license. I know Nutanix got into hot water about distributing Minio so I don't think any big shop will fork it.

Nuantrix distributed a version that was still Apache licensed and merely failed to disclose they had made changes.

This is after MinIO asserted that Weka had also stolen their AGPL-licensed code, showing that they extracted binaries from the distribution. They forgot that that 3-month old (unmodified) version was still Apache licensed though.

MinIO generally don't seem to consult lawyers often. They haven't even set up copyright assignment / CLA immediately after switching the license, so technically they are also incapable of selling AGPL license exceptions just like everyone else.

I've done my best to keep MinIO away from most infra I manage, not because of legal concerns but because it was kind of obvious they'd eventually go full scorched earth and either drop images or the source code distribution all together. Maybe now we can all move on to a fork, or SeaweedFS, or Ceph, or literally anything else.

Re: MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

#208

Post by nik736 »

stanac wrote: post #9
nik736 wrote: post #5

Is there a fork already?

Do we need a fork? As an example, ffmpeg is source only for mac and windows, which just means someone else is building and distributing binaries.

They changed their license to AGPL, removed features (Web UI, etc.) and now they don't provide docker images/binaries. It's their project but; what's next?

Re: MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

#209

Post by rapnie »

Eisenstein wrote: post #139
Ekaros wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why isn't there similar expectations for users of Open source? That is be ready to take over yourself if maintainers do not want to do something anymore? Do not ask or demand anything. Do not expect anything but the code. To understand that you can not expect or be entitled to anything. And celebrate what you get just now. With this the solution becomes obvious. You select piece of technology to build on you are full…

I think you are digging in a little too hard here. If someone offers a capability that you don't have, and you build that into something you use, then saying that they should be ready for it to go away at any time and be happy to have had it, seems a little too much. If there had never been an offer, they would not have built around it, and would have found another solution and, even if harder or more inconvenient, l…

Metaphor I often see in FOSS. You are this hobby painter sitting every morning on Monmartre square in Paris, painting. It attracts people's eyes. They love your work and you become a sensation, going viral. Instagram influencers from around the world just need you in their picture, they say. You just shrug and paint. One day you got bored of Monmartre. Of pleasing the crowds. You want rest, a spot in nature to paint in peace. When the crowd learns, an angry oproar bursts out, and people demand you stick to your familiar spot, or else.

Re: MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

#210

Post by imiric »

jamespo wrote: post #123
cies wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the comments on Github (linked by the title)? So many commenters are just plain rude. They got free value for along time. Someone giving the free value decides to allocate their time otherwise. And the long-time receivers of the free value now cannot behave. And you seem to make excuses for them... It's just rude to behave like that after having enjoyed gifts for so long. They behave like spoiled childre…

Github is awash with accounts with zero contributions to anything who use it to lobby for their personal requirements.

This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of OSS.

You're essentially saying that only users who contribute to OSS are worthy of attention and support. This is no different than saying that only commercial users, or those from specific countries, backgrounds, or industries are worthy of the same.

Those users who create issues, request features, and, yes, ask for support, are as valuable as those who contribute code or money. They're all part of the same community of users that help build a successful product. And they do it for free for you, because they're passionate about the product itself.

If you think otherwise then you should make your terms of service explicit by using a restrictive license and business model. OSS is not for you.

Yes, some people can be rude, demanding, and unworthy of your attention. But you make those boundaries clear, not treat all non-paying users as entitled children.

Post reply on HN