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MinIO repository is no longer maintained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

381–390 of 397 posts

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#381

Post by true_religion »

victormy wrote: post #333
NetMageSCW wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This change is them essentially declaring that MinIO is EOL and will not have any further updates. Just fork it!

Simply forking it won't work. The legal risks have been well-documented. Under their AGPL + Commercial model, the moment your fork gets too popular, MinIO can just shut you down. This is exactly why the smart money and talent have already moved on to systems like RustFS, SeaweedFS, and Garage instead of trying to maintain a doomed fork.

The only risk is if you’re trying to bootstrap your competitors with their open source contribution, and have a paid private integrations.

AGPL means you cannot do this. This is less of a risk, than it is the explicit intention of the Licence.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#383

Post by elvinagy »

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…

Elvin here from RustFS. Appreciate the feedback, especially coming from the Milvus team—we’ve followed your work for a long time.

You’re right about the "tension" in OSS. That’s exactly why we are pledging to keeping the RustFS core engine permanently open-source. We want to provide the solid, open foundation you mentioned so that teams like yours don't feel forced to build and maintain a storage layer from scratch.

On the sustainability question—you've described the challenge better than most. We're still figuring out the right model, and I don't think anyone has a perfect answer yet. What we do know is that we're building something technically excellent first, and we're committed to doing it in a way that keeps the core open.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#384

Post by yencabulator »

merb wrote: post #371
Ensorceled wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I doubt that minio pulled the open source version because they were mistreated. Really yeah there are some projects where this is a problem, but it’s mostly because the project only has a single maintainer. People are angry about minio , but that’s because of their rugpull.

The minio people did a lot of questionable things even before the rugpull. They tried to claim AGPL infects software over the network, on a previous version of https://min.io/compliance

> Combining MinIO software as part of a larger software stack triggers your GNU AGPL v3 obligations. The method of combining does not matter. When MinIO is linked to a larger software stack in any form, including statically, dynamically, pipes, or containerized and invoked remotely, the AGPL v3 applies to your use. What triggers the AGPL v3 obligations is the exchanging data between the larger stack and MinIO.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#385

Post by yencabulator »

q3k wrote: post #361
Giefo6ah wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ceph solves the distributed consistent block storage problem very well. But I hardly ever need that problem solved, it's way more often that I need a distributed highly available blob storage, and Ceph makes the wrong tradeoffs for this task.

Ceph is fundamentally an object storage system. RBD (block devices) are built on top of that layer.

Yeah. 100% this. Remember, Ceph's storage nodes are called OSD, as in Object Storage Daemon.

The biggest reasons to not use Ceph are:

- You plan on using - You don't have at least fractional ops staff that will look at a dashboard regularly. In this world, you're better off using a cloud service.

- You're 100% satisfied with the S3 interface and will never want anything else than its write-once objects. Ceph's writable object support won't gain you anything in that world, and genuinely makes the distributed systems problems involved much harder. Ceph was architected as a distributed filesystem and excels as a networked block store for virtual machines. Ceph can do S3-compatibility, but another implementation can cut off a big chunk of the functionality and provide just S3-compat, and simpler can be better.

I doubt many software projects mentioned in this conversation have gone through the extensive stress testing with glitching nodes while trying to maintain performance that Ceph has; simple systems can be too simple. Ceph is quite well battle-hardened by now. Ceph's dedicated QA hardware pool is likely bigger than many competing projects have tried as a cluster size!

Disclaimer: ex-Ceph-developer.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#386

Post by yencabulator »

PunchyHamster wrote: post #378
__turbobrew__ wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ceph has synchronous replication, writes have to be acked by all replicas before the client gets an ack. Fundamentally, the latency of ceph is at least the latency between the OSDs. This is a tradeoff ceph makes for strong consistency.

I know. We run it for near a decade now. I mentioned it because a lot of uses for minio are pretty small. I had 2 servers at home running their builtin site replication and it was super easy setup that would take far more of both hardware and work to replicate to ceph so while ceph might be theoretically fitting feature list, realisticially it isn't an option.

The Ceph way of doing asynchronous replication would be to run separate clusters and ship incremental snapshots between them. I don't know if anyone's programmed the automation for that, but it's definitely doable. For S3 only, radosgw has it's own async replication thing.

https://ceph.io/en/news/blog/2025/stretch-cluuuuuuuuusters-p...

Disclaimer: ex-Ceph-developer.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#387

Post by yencabulator »

PunchyHamster wrote: post #86
wvh wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Minio started like that but they migrated away from it. It's just hard to keep it up once you start implementing advanced S3 features (versioning/legal hold, metadata etc.) and storage features (replication/erasure coding)

There's plenty of middle ground between "just expose underlying FS as objects, can't support many S3 operations well" and "it's a single node not a distributed storage system".

For my personal use, asynchronous remote backup is plenty for durability, a Bee-Link ME Mini with 6x4TB NVMe is plenty of space for any bucket I care to have, and I'd love to have an S3 server that doesn't even attempt to be distributed.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#389

Post by phoronixrly »

tracker1 wrote: post #368
phoronixrly wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

aistor is proprietary software[1]. Having an old version of your software be open source does not make your software open-source. Why does this need an explanation? [1] https://www.min.io/legal/aistor-free-agreement

You aren't entitled to the product of someone else's work even if they gave away older versions of that work... What is so hard for you to understand about that?

No, I no longer am, because aistor/minio decided they no longer respect their users' freedom. It's as simple as that -- aistor is unethical and borders on malware.

Re: MinIO repository is no longer maintained

#390

Post by skeledrew »

sgarland wrote: post #365
skeledrew wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> shady business tactic I'd say it's redundant to consider any business tactic as "shady". The purpose of any business is to make a profit, in any way that's legally permissible. Using the "open source" label is just one way to success, if one plays the game well and mitigates any backlash once they "graduate" and change that license. It's up to any given user going in to be aware that a project they depend on may go…

That’s the myopic view of a business, yes. It works quite well at scale; reference Wal-Mart, Microsoft, et al. It isn’t the only way, though. H-E-B (or just HEB) is a large, privately-held grocery chain in Texas, and they are beloved by Texans across the societal and political spectrum. They gained and keep this loyalty because they are good neighbors. In the aftermath of hurricanes or floods - of which Texas has man…

Sounds like they're a good way on the road to being a social enterprise. A very rare thing indeed.
Post reply on HN