51–60 of 68 posts
https://duckdb.org/community_extensions/extensions/duckpgq.h...
DuckPGQ is an interesting option, but unfortunately, that project hasn't been touched in a few months and does not currently work with the latest version of DuckDB.
Oh too bad. Small fast embedded graph DBs are rare. Any good alternatives?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does an MIT-licensed open source project owe you anything whatsoever?
It's not about what is owed; it's about what can be trusted. The people behind Kuzu have shown that they cannot be trusted to be used.
Python dropped or changed a lot of things between Python 2 and Python 3, creating a lot of rework for a lot of users. Are they not to be trusted as a project? Is every project obligated to support every feature they ever released, forever, to be considered trustworthy?
To quote from the MIT license: THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not about what is owed; it's about what can be trusted. The people behind Kuzu have shown that they cannot be trusted to be used.
I don't see why. Every project periodically decides what features they will move forward with and what features they will drop. Some users will have built dependencies on those dropped features. That's their problem, not the software project developers. Python dropped or changed a lot of things between Python 2 and Python 3, creating a lot of rework for a lot of users. Are they not to be trusted as a project? Is ever…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why. Every project periodically decides what features they will move forward with and what features they will drop. Some users will have built dependencies on those dropped features. That's their problem, not the software project developers. Python dropped or changed a lot of things between Python 2 and Python 3, creating a lot of rework for a lot of users. Are they not to be trusted as a project? Is ever…
Huh. Your examples are not relevant because they do not apply to killing a project altogether, let alone to killing your very first project. Kuzu did both.
If the rest of us criticized people making open source like you do, there wouldn’t be any.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh. Your examples are not relevant because they do not apply to killing a project altogether, let alone to killing your very first project. Kuzu did both.
They tried something hard and it didn’t work out. In the process they did some great work. Plus they gave it all away for free, allowing literally anyone in the world to continue the work. They are awesome. If the rest of us criticized people making open source like you do, there wouldn’t be any.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They tried something hard and it didn’t work out. In the process they did some great work. Plus they gave it all away for free, allowing literally anyone in the world to continue the work. They are awesome. If the rest of us criticized people making open source like you do, there wouldn’t be any.
That's not how open source adoption works. For open source to get used, people have to trust that it will be maintained. The people behind Kuzu ruined any trust in them. This is also why people prefer established choices over the fashion of the day.
Disparaging them and suggesting people should not trust them in the future for not providing ongoing maintenance, when that was never part of the OSS deal, shows a misunderstanding of what OSS is. Pay them for a maintenance contract, or don't expect maintenance. Stop complaining they didn't fulfill some social contract that existed only in your head.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not how open source adoption works. For open source to get used, people have to trust that it will be maintained. The people behind Kuzu ruined any trust in them. This is also why people prefer established choices over the fashion of the day.
No that's exactly how open source works. They are under zero obligation to wake up tomorrow and continue to work on it. Everyone is lucky they open sourced it, and anyone else is welcome to pick it up where they left off. Contributing a impressive piece of work the community is an accomplishment. Disparaging them and suggesting people should not trust them in the future for not providing ongoing maintenance, when tha…
It merely is one of several predictors of whether something is sufficiently reliable for use. In the case of Kuzu, its authors have demonstrated that they're not to be trusted.