321–330 of 408 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The replacement should be written in a memory-safe language. Including the TLS library. "There is more to life than increasing its speed."
Does it start with an "R" and rhyme with "repeated-so-often-its-been-ground-into-the-dust"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could AGPL and sell proprietary exceptions. Amazon won't touch AGPL code.
Others are happy to provide AGPLv3 code as SaaS, look at MongoDB's issues. You can build a ton of tooling around said code to enhance performance, adding features and billing, all while not modifying the core AGPLv3 code and thus avoiding the need to contribute back. This is a scummy business practice, but technically legal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What happened is the realisation that FOSS developers also have to pay their bills and idealism only takes so far. So anyone that refuses to pay for their tools will eventually either loose them, or contend to be happy to use lesser ones.
Exactly right. Its amazing thing in software industry that developers want to be highly paid themselves along with free work from other software developers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But K8s is not a development of Google software. It is developed specifically for the public, it throws out all of the interesting parts of Borg, and Google themselves don't use it, or barely do. As for that other stuff it seems to have worked out fine for Google: they describe obsolete technologies and the outside world develops hideous analogs of those and uses them for decades. Hadoop for example is just an unbeli…
Implementation matters to google, more than to say the average company that uses Hadoop. At "Google-scale" small imperfections become huge imperfections. What's good for the bottom 90% of tech companies probably isn't for the top 10%.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to the public statements, F5 is committing to maintain the current level of resources NGINX has allocated to their open source programs, to keep the same dev team involved, to keep licensing as it currently is, not change any of the repositories on Mercurial and GitHub and to keep the NGINX brand. Which only means that NGINX will get even better over time.
NGINX was already paywalling bug fixes once they launched Pro. proxy_pass for example will only resolve a hostname at the time the configuration is parsed, unless you use a convoluted variable hack. This was a serious issue requiring you to restart your fleet if a backend server changed IPs. The bug fix for this was implemented only in Pro and sold as "DNS for Service Discovery."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Implementation matters to google, more than to say the average company that uses Hadoop. At "Google-scale" small imperfections become huge imperfections. What's good for the bottom 90% of tech companies probably isn't for the top 10%.
I'd argue Kubernetes isn't the best choice for the bottom 90%. There's a lot of companies you could describe as tech and many are doing just fine in the old world of manual application provisioning.
Exactly. Instead of having something so simple that scales for 90% of everyone's needs. We have solution that Most enterprise wants and filter down from top to bottom. And it is true in almost all Tech things related.
I'm nervous about what this means for the future of nginx's built in load balancing. That's been an important and rock-solid part of my infrastructure.
Throwing out a question to the room: if the worst happens and Nginx gets butchered, would it be so bad to go back to using Apache? I've never used it really, everything I've done has been Nginx, but is there some technical reason why Apache wouldn't be a fine fallback option for an open-source server?
Apache has improved and now has things such as Event MPM inspired by nginx. Nowadays most of us would run applications behind a proxy, not by running mod_php or mod_python directly - which made old school apps very slow.
Also Apache is notoriously easy to configure. And Nginx still absolutely rules when delivering static content. There is also Varnish Cache which is very good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Hashicorp[0] has nailed down the open source enterprise model perfectly. Where they make open source software for enterprise and provide services to support. [0]: https://www.hashicorp.com
Hashicorp is one of those companies I want to support, but all of their pricing and enterprise details are behind a "Contact sales" button, so it is really hard to get to know their offerings and their pricing. I understand we might be too small to matter for them if we aren't ready to dump thousands of dollars per month into their bankaccount, but it does makes me cautious about what is going to happen with them whe…
So...what is the future of enterprise open source? Is there a future for enterprise open source? If you start a company and open source your core/clients, your product becomes part of AWS, and AWS runs you into the ground. If you mix in proprietary licenses to protect yourself, AWS forks your core, adds in open-source licensed clients, then runs you into the ground (and you lose open-source contributors/supporters as…
But apparently, Oracle is a bad guy for doing this, and Google is applauded for stealing Java.
Can't have it both ways.