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MinIO repository is no longer maintained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

281–290 of 397 posts

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#281

Post by dathinab »

victormy wrote: post #236

First off, I don't think there is anything wrong with MinIO closing down its open source. There are simply too many people globally who use open source without being willing to pay for it. I started testing various alternatives a few months ago, and I still believe RustFS will emerge as the winner after MinIO's exit. I evaluated Garage, SeaweedFS, Ceph, and RustFS. Here are my conclusions: 1. RustFS and SeaweedFS are…

> 4. Ceph [...]

MinIO was more for the "mini" use case (or more like "anything not large scale", with a very broad definition of large scale). Here "works out of the box" is paramount.

And Ceph is more for the maxi use case. Here in depth fine tuning, highly complex setups, distributed setups and similar are the norm. Hence out of the box small scale setup experience is bearly relevant.

So they really don't fill out the same space, even through their functionality overlaps.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#282

Post by einpoklum »

StopDisinfo910 wrote: post #60
einpoklum wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ultimately, dealing with people who don't pay for your product is not fun. I find it the other way around. I feel a bit embarrassed and stressed out working with people who have paid for a copy of software I've made (which admittedly is rather rare). When they haven't paid, every exchange is about what's best for humanity and the public in general, i.e. they're not supposed to get some special treatment at the expe…

People who paid for your software don't really have a right to lord you around. You can chose to be accommodating because they are your customers but you hold approximately as much if not more weight in the relationship. They need your work. It's not so much special treatment as it is commissioned work. People who don't pay are often not really invested. The relationship between more work means more costs doesn't exi…

> People who paid for your software don't really have a right to lord you around.

Of course I realize that, rationally, but:

* They might feel highly entitled because they paid.

* I feel more anxious to satisfy than I should probably be feeling. Perhaps even guilty for having taken money. I realize that is not a rational frame of mind to be in; it would probably change if that happened frequently. I am used to two things: There is my voluntary work, which I share freely and without expecting money; and there is my 'job' where I have to bow my head to management and do not get to pursue the work as I see fit, and I devote most of my time to - but I get paid (which also kind of happens in the background, i.e. I never see the person who actually pays me). Selling a product or a service is a weird third kind of experience which I'm not used to.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#283

Post by Ensorceled »

merb wrote: post #221
Ensorceled wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Running a successful OSS project is often a thankless job. Thanks for doing it. But this isn’t that. No, even if you are being paid, it's a thankless, painful job to deal with demanding, entitled free users. It's worse if you are not being paid, but I'm not sure why you are asserting dealing with bullshit is just peachy if you are being paid.

If that is the case why did minio start with the open source version? If there were only downsides? Sounds like stupid business plan

Where did I say there were only downsides? There are definitely upsides to this business model, I'm just refuting the idea that because there are for profit motives the downsides go away.

I hate when people mistreat the people that provide services to them: doesn't matter if it's a volunteer, underpaid waitress or well paid computer programmer. The mistreatment doesn't become "ok" because the person being mistreated is paid.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#284

Post by victormy »

singhrac wrote: post #275
victormy wrote: post #236

First off, I don't think there is anything wrong with MinIO closing down its open source. There are simply too many people globally who use open source without being willing to pay for it. I started testing various alternatives a few months ago, and I still believe RustFS will emerge as the winner after MinIO's exit. I evaluated Garage, SeaweedFS, Ceph, and RustFS. Here are my conclusions: 1. RustFS and SeaweedFS are…

I want to like RustFS, but it feels like there's so much marketing attached to the software it turns me off a little. Even a little rocket emoji and benchmark in the Github about page. Sometimes less is more. Look at the ty Github home page - 1 benchmark on the main page, the description is just "An extremely fast Python type checker and language server, written in Rust.".

Haha, +1. I really like RustFS as a product, but the marketing fluff and documentation put me off too. It reads like non-native speakers relying heavily on AI, which explains a lot. Honestly, they really need to bring in some native English speakers to overhaul the docs. The current vibe just doesn't land well with a US audience.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#285

Post by victormy »

gunapologist99 wrote: post #273
victormy wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I respectfully disagree with the notion that open source is strictly a licensing model and not a business model. For an open-source project to achieve long-term reliability and growth, it must be backed by a sustainable commercial engine. History has shown that simply donating a project to a foundation (like Apache or CNCF) isn't a silver bullet; many projects under those umbrellas still struggle to find the resource…

> For an open-source project to achieve long-term reliability and growth, it must be backed by a sustainable commercial engine You mean like Linux, Python, PostgreSQL, Apache HTTP Server, Node.js, MariaDB, GNU Bash, GNU Coreutils, SQLite, VLC, LibreOffice, OpenSSH?

Actually, Linux reinforces my point. It isn't powered solely by volunteers; it thrives because the world's largest corporations (Intel, Google, Red Hat, etc.) foot the bill. The Linux Foundation is massively funded by corporate members, and most kernel contributors are paid engineers. Without that commercial engine, Linux would not have the dominance it does today. Even OpenAI had to pivot away from its original non-profit, open principles to survive and scale. There is nothing wrong with making money while sustaining open source. The problem is MinIO's specific approach. Instead of a symbiotic relationship, they treated the community as free QA testers and marketing pawns, only to pull up the ladder later. That’s a "bait-and-switch," not a sustainable business model.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#286

Post by zenoprax »

pellepelster wrote: post #277
gunapologist99 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Garage installation is easy. 1. Download or build the single binary into your system (install like `/usr/local/sbin/garage`) 2. Create a file `/etc/garage.toml`: metadata_dir = "/data/garage/meta" data_dir = "/data/garage/data" db_engine = "sqlite" replication_factor = 1 rpc_bind_addr = "[::]:3901" rpc_public_addr = "127.0.0.1:3901" rpc_secret = "[your rpc secret]" [s3_api] s3_region = "garage" api_bind_addr = "[::]:…

If you are on Hetzner, I created a ready to use Terraform module that spins up a single node GarageFs server https://pellepelster.github.io/solidblocks/hetzner/web-s3-do...

As someone about to learn the basics of Terraform, with an interest in geo-distributed storage, and with some Hetzner credit sitting idle... I came across the perfect comment this morning.

I might extend this with ZeroFS too.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#287

Post by matheus-rr »

The thing that strikes me about this thread is how many people are scrambling to evaluate alternatives they've never tested in production. That's the real risk with infrastructure dependencies — it's not that they might go closed-source, it's that the switching cost is so high that you don't maintain a credible plan B.

With application dependencies you can swap a library in a day. With object storage that's holding your data, you're looking at a migration measured in weeks or months. The S3 API compatibility helps, but anyone who's actually migrated between S3-compatible stores knows there are subtle behavioral differences that only surface under load.

I wonder how many MinIO deployments had a documented migration runbook before today.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#288

Post by growse »

PKop wrote: post #271
growse wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a social contract, which for many people is a moral contract.

Expectations are maybe fine maybe not, but it's funny that people can slap the word moral onto their expectation of others being obligated to do free work for them, and it's supposed to make them be the good guys here. Why do you presume to think your definition of morals is shared by everyone? Why is entitlement to others labor the moral position, instead of the immoral position?

> Why is entitlement to others labor the moral position, instead of the immoral position?

You seem to be mistaking me for someone arguing that anyone is entitled to others' labour?

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#289

Post by overfeed »

victormy wrote: post #285
gunapologist99 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For an open-source project to achieve long-term reliability and growth, it must be backed by a sustainable commercial engine You mean like Linux, Python, PostgreSQL, Apache HTTP Server, Node.js, MariaDB, GNU Bash, GNU Coreutils, SQLite, VLC, LibreOffice, OpenSSH?

Actually, Linux reinforces my point. It isn't powered solely by volunteers; it thrives because the world's largest corporations (Intel, Google, Red Hat, etc.) foot the bill. The Linux Foundation is massively funded by corporate members, and most kernel contributors are paid engineers. Without that commercial engine, Linux would not have the dominance it does today. Even OpenAI had to pivot away from its original non-…

> Actually, Linux reinforces my point.

Not many open source projects are Linux-sized. Linux is worth billions of dollars and enabled Google and Redhat to exist, so they can give back millions, without compulsion, and in a self-interested way.

Random library maintainer dude should not expect their (very replaceable) library to print money. The cool open source tool/utility could be a 10-person company, maybe 100 tops, but people see dollar-signs in their eyes based on number of installs/GitHub stars, and get VC funding to take a swing for billions in ARR.

I remember when (small scale) open source was about scratching your own itch without making it a startup via user-coercion. It feels like the 'Open source as a growth-hack" has metastasized into "Now that they are hooked, entire user base is morally obligated to give me money". I would have no issue if a project included this before it gets popular - but that may prevent popular adoption. So it rubs me the wrong way when folk want to have their cake and eat it.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#290

Post by j1elo »

baq wrote: post #253
j1elo wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only meaningful informed decision, but sadly much less known (and I think we should talk and insist more on it), is to be wary if you see a CLA . Not all do, but most perform Copyright Assignment, and that's detrimental to the long-term robustness of Open Source. Having a FOSS license is NOT enough. Idealy the copyright should be distributed across all contributors. That's the only way to make overall consensus a…

Bad advice. You should be wary always. CLA or not, nothing guarantees that the project you depend on will receive updates, not even if you pay for them and the project is 100% closed source. What you’re suggesting is perpetuating the myth that open source means updates available forever for free. This is not and never has been the case.

Was I, really? Maybe, if you feel so... but I'd have to say that I had no idea.

What I'm suggesting is that a FOSS project without CLAs and a healthy variety of contributors does belong to the broad open source community that forms around it, while a FOSS project with such CLA is just open to a bait-and-switch scheme because the ownership stays in a single hand that can change course at a moments notice.

Whether the project stops receiving updates or not, is an orthogonal matter.

Post reply on HN