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MinIO repository is no longer maintained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

291–300 of 397 posts

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#291

Post by skrtskrt »

ranger_danger wrote: post #200
jodrellblank wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never heard of SeaweedFS, but Ceph cluster storage system has an S3-compatible layer (Object Gateway). It’s used by CERN to make Petabyte-scale storage capable of ingesting data from particle collider experiments and they're now up to 17 clusters and 74PB which speaks to its production stability. Apparently people use it down to 3-host Proxmox virtualisation clusters, in a similar place as VMware VSAN. Ceph has…

Ceph is a non-starter for me because you cannot have an existing filesystem on the disk. Previously I used GlusterFS on top of ZFS and made heavy use of gluster's async geo-replication feature to keep two storage arrays in sync that were far away over a slow link. This was done after getting fed up with rsync being so slow and always thrashing the disks having to scan many TBs every day. While there is a geo-replicat…

Ceph is a non-starter because you need a team of people managing it constantly

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#292

Post by overfeed »

victormy wrote: post #261
PunchyHamster wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I don't think this is a problem. The CLA is there to avoid future legal disputes. It prevents contributors from initiating IP lawsuits later on, which could cause significantly more trouble for the project.

Hypothetically, isn't one of the "legal disputes" that's avoided is if the projects relicenses to a closed-source model without compensating contributors, the contributors can't sue because the copyright of the contributions no longer belongs to be them?

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#293

Post by eikenberry »

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.

I've been involved with free software for coming on 30 years, have maintained several reasonably popular free software projects and have 100% enjoyed it every time. Developing relationships with the community members and working with them toward a common goal is very rewarding. Not much more to say about this as these are subjective interpretations of our experiences and the experiences could be very different. But it definitely can be fun.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#294

Post by ktosobcy »

Ensorceled wrote: post #187
mbreese wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The MinIO business model was a freemium model (well, Open Source + commercial support, which is slightly different). They used the free OSS version to drive demand for the commercially licensed version. It’s not like they had a free community version with users they needed to support thrust upon them — this was their plan. They weren’t volunteers. You could argue that they got to the point where the benefit wasn’t wo…

> 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.

> No, even if you are being paid, it's a thankless, painful job to deal with demanding, entitled free users.

So… aren't they providing (paid) support? same thing…

Absurd comparison.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#295

Post by hajile »

redskyluan wrote: post #262
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…

Maintainer of Milvus here. A few thoughts from someone who lives this every day: 1. The free user problem is real, and AI makes it worse. We serve a massive community of free Milvus users — and we're grateful for them, they make the project what it is. But we also feel the tension MinIO is describing. You invest serious engineering effort into stability and bug fixes, and most users will never become paying customers…

GPL for open source and commercial license for the enterprise lawyers.

Unfortunately, a majority seems to hate GPL these days even though it prevents most of the worst corporate behaviors.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#296

Post by dark-star »

wvh wrote: post #36
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

Apart from Minio, we tried Garage and Ceph. I think there's definitely a need for something that interfaces using S3 API but is just a simple file system underneath, for local, testing and small scale deployments. Not sure that exists? Of course a lot of stuff is being bolted onto S3 and it's not as simple as it initially claimed to be.

The problem with that approach is that S3 object names are not compatible with POSIX file names. They can contain characters that are not valid on a filesystem, or have special meaning (like "/")

A simple litmus test I like to do with S3 storages is to create two objects, one called "foo" and one called "foo/bar". If the S3 uses a filesystem as backend, only the first of those can be created

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#297

Post by dangus »

imtringued wrote: post #198
skeledrew wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this particular case, it's the fault of the "abused" for even seeing themselves as such in the first place. Many times it's not even a "bait-and-switch", but reality hitting. But even if it was, just deal with it and move on.

This is definitely the case because the accusations and supposed social contract seem extremely one-sided towards free riding. Nobody here is saying they should donate the last version of MinIO to the Apache software foundation under the Apache license. Nobody is arguing for a formalized "end of life" exit strategy for company oriented open source software or implying that such a strategy was promised and then betray…

I’m not even claiming that people who feel thar feel that a social contract has been violated are correct.

I’m saying that the open source rug pull is at this point a known business tactic that is essentially a psychological dark pattern used to exploit.

These companies know they’ll get more traction and sales if they have “open source” on their marketing material. They don’t/never actually intend to be open source long term. They expect to go closed source/source available business lines as soon as they’ve locked enough people into the ecosystem.

Open source maintainers/organizations like the GNU project are happy and enthusiastic about delivering their projects to “freeloaders.” They have a sincere belief that having source code freedom is beneficial to all involved. Even corporate project sponsors share this belief: Meta is happy to give away React because they know that ultimately makes their own products better and more competitive.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#298

Post by salawat »

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.

That's your first mistake. Thinking any company truly gives a shit about ethics when it negatively impacts what it is they actually want to do.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#299

Post by dangus »

skeledrew wrote: post #159
dangus wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In this particular case, it's the fault of the "abused" for even seeing themselves as such in the first place. Many times it's not even a "bait-and-switch", but reality hitting. But even if it was, just deal with it and move on.

I’m not even claiming that the “abused” are correct to be upset.

The core of my claim is that it’s a shady business tactic because the purpose of it is to gain all the marketing benefits of open source on the front-end (fast user growth, unpaid contributions from users, “street cred” and positive goodwill), then change to source available/business license after the end of the growth phase when users are locked in.

This is not much different than Southwest Airlines spending decades bragging about “bags fly free” and no fees only to pull the rug and dump their customer goodwill in the toilet.

Totally legal to do so, but it’s also totally legal for me to think that they’re dishonest scumbags.

Except in this case, software companies, in my opinion, have this rug pull plan in place from day 1.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#300

Post by dangus »

nubinetwork wrote: post #141
dangus wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Free without commercial restrictions? With a real open source license?
Post reply on HN