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

MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 338 posts

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#231

Post by 56kbr »

singhrac wrote: post #136
everfrustrated wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might be because of this other storage product named that https://github.com/NVIDIA/aistore

Does anyone use this? I was setting it up a few months ago but it felt very complicated compared to MinIO (or alternatives). Is there a sort of minikube-like tool I could use here?

There's a development/playground deployment for local K8s (e.g. Minikube, KinD): https://github.com/NVIDIA/aistore/tree/main/deploy/dev/k8s.

For production you'd need a proper cluster deployed via Helm, but for trying it out locally that setup is easy to get running.

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#232

Post by sieabahlpark »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #187
lima wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They required a "Community Contribution License" in each PR description, which licensed each contribution under Apache 2 as an inbound license. Meanwhile, MinIO's own contributions and the distribution itself (outbound license) were AGPL licensed. It's effectively a CLA, just a bit weaker, since they're still bound by the terms of Apache 2 vs. a full license assignment like most CLAs.

People underestimate the amount of fakeness a lot of these "open-core/source" orgs have. I guarantee from day one of starting the MinIO project, they had eyes on future commercialization, and of course made contributors sign away their rights knowing full well they are going to go closed source.

[dead]

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#233

Post by victormy »

Big thanks to MinIO, RustFS, and Garage for their contributions. That said, MinIO closing the door on open source so abruptly definitely spooked the community. But honestly, fair play to them—open source projects eventually need a path to monetization.

I’ve evaluated both RustFS and Garage, and here’s the breakdown:

Release Cadence: Garage feels a bit slower, while RustFS is shipping updates almost weekly.

Licensing: Garage is on AGPLv3, but RustFS uses the Apache license (which is huge for enterprise adoption).

Stability: Garage currently has the edge in distributed environments.

With MinIO effectively bowing out of the OSS race, my money is on RustFS to take the lead.

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#234

Post by mschuster91 »

paulddraper wrote: post #210

Open source is not a sustainable business model. There are two ways open source projects continue. 1. The creator has a real, solid way to make money (React by Facebook, Go by Google). 2. The project is extremely popular (Linux, PostreSQL). Is it possible for people to reliably keep working for ~free? In theory yes, but if you expect that, you have a very bad understanding of 98% of human behavior.

There's actually three ways, the third one being academia picking up the bill which is how we got the mess that is OpenStack.

Also, Debian has been around for a few decades, although I do admit that - like the Linux kernel - that wouldn't have been possible without a lot of companies contributing back to the ecosystem.

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#235

Post by tetha »

ahepp wrote: post #182
phoronixrly wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just watch them harass fork users with proprietary stacks as they used to: https://github.com/minio/minio/issues/13308#issuecomment-929... https://github.com/minio/minio/discussions/13571#discussionc...

Wait, what's the consensus on this? Are they saying that using object storage over a standard network API which they didn't even create, makes your application a derivative work of the object store? Or just that the users would need to make minio sources, including modifications, freely available? I guess that's kind of the big question inherent to the AGPL?

From my understanding, you would not be allowed to sell an "S3 compatible storage" as a service based off of Minio or another AGPL licensed S3-compatible storage solution, especially if you modify the source code of minio in any way and then serve that to your customers.

If you use Minio or another AGPL licensed service internally to support your own product without a customer ever touching it's API, it should be fine.

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#236

Post by victormy »

cantagi wrote: post #33

They have been removing features from the open source version for a while. The closest alternative seems to be RustFS. Has anyone tried it? I was waiting until they support site replication before switching.

The Good: Single-node is stable, and the team moves fast—most of my reported bugs get patched within a couple of weeks. The Bad: Distributed mode needs work. Bucket replication and lifecycle policies are still WIP (as noted in their roadmap) and not usable yet.

It's promising, but definitely check the roadmap before deploying at scale.

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#237

Post by dark-star »

aftbit wrote: post #79

Shocker... they abandoned POSIX compatibility, built a massively over-complicated product, then failed to compete with things like Ceph on the metal side or ubiquitous S3/R2/B2 on the cloud side.

S3 object names are not POSIX compatible.

"foo" and "foo/bar" are valid S3 object names that cannot coexist on a POSIX filesystem

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#238

Post by dark-star »

Dachande663 wrote: post #19

Does anyone have any recommendations for a simple S3-wrapper to a standard dir? I've got a few apps/services that can send data to S3 (or S3 compatible services) that I want to point to a local server I have, but they don't support SFTP or any of the more "primitive" solutions. I did use a python local-s3 thing, but it was... not good.

that is not easily possible. In S3, "foo" and "foo/bar" are valid and distinct object names that cannot be directly mapped to a POSIX directory. As soon as you create one of those objects, you cannot create the other

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#239

Post by syabro »

js4ever wrote: post #176
cantagi wrote: post #33

They have been removing features from the open source version for a while. The closest alternative seems to be RustFS. Has anyone tried it? I was waiting until they support site replication before switching.

I made recently an open source alternative to minio Server & minio UI also in Rust: https://github.com/vibecoder-host/ironbucket/ https://github.com/vibecoder-host/ironbucket-ui

Probably just me but I would stay away from anything saying vibecoder in the repo

Re: MinIO is now in maintenance-mode

#240

Post by victormy »

runiq wrote: post #178
eproxus wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that page is horrendous and looks super sketchy. It looks like a very professional fishing attempt to get unsuspecting developers to download malware. They have a lot of obviously fake quotes from non-existent people at positions that don’t even mention what company it is. The pictures are misgendered and even contain pictures of kids. Feels like the whole page is AI generated.

They have a CLA that assigns copyright to them: https://github.com/rustfs/rustfs/blob/5b0a3a07645364d998e3f5... So, arguably worse than MinIO.

Without a valid CLA and a strong core team, you often end up with fragmentation or legal deadlock. Even the ASF isn't a silver bullet—projects without strong leadership die there all the time. The CLA exists to prevent that friction.
Post reply on HN