5 ms·

Wow, in the course of this HN thread I went from learning about Caddy, to deciding against using it. Definitely not cool to immediately threaten legal action al

Wow, in the course of this HN thread I went from learning about Caddy, to deciding against using it. Definitely not cool to immediately threaten legal action almost instantly after forking. Definitely not cool to force a header. I'll be sticking with nginx.

callahad 9y ago
Which is frustrating, because Caddy is a great product, especially from a solo operator standpoint. Configuration is simple and the defaults are sane. The humans behind Caddy are nice people. And while this move has somewhat soured my opinion of the project, I'm not so much angry as I am... sad. I want to use Caddy. I am using Caddy. But I don't want to use this Caddy, at the moment.
- kuschku 9y ago
  Actually, the defaults are quite insane. For example: You might know that all domain names are in the root zone, named ".", so any domain actually is resolved to e.g. news.ycombinator.com. And if you enter the domain with the dot, it is the same DNS name, and should give you the same result. Apache does that, Nginx does that, Google’s cloud does that, Amazon’s cloud does that, all major sites do that... Caddy considers it irrelevant, and something users should add manually for all of their rules if they want it. Ignoring all the RFCs, because of personal ideals. https://github.com/mholt/caddy/issues/1632 https://github.com/mholt/caddy/issues/1632
Posibyte 9y ago
Exactly. I've heard raving reviews of how amazing Caddy is, but as I said earlier in this thread, the threat of filing trademark violations before even giving time for intent to be reasonably argued feels like a power play to scare the forks. It also makes their "We love Open Source!" claims feel much less genuine. I'm not excited about it as much anymore :\
llao 9y ago
It is worth revisiting the trademark-thread, the responses of everyone involved are level-headed and civil.

callahad 9y ago

Which is frustrating, because Caddy is a great product, especially from a solo operator standpoint. Configuration is simple and the defaults are sane. The humans behind Caddy are nice people. And while this move has somewhat soured my opinion of the project, I'm not so much angry as I am... sad. I want to use Caddy. I am using Caddy. But I don't want to use this Caddy, at the moment.

kuschku 9y ago
Actually, the defaults are quite insane. For example: You might know that all domain names are in the root zone, named ".", so any domain actually is resolved to e.g. news.ycombinator.com. And if you enter the domain with the dot, it is the same DNS name, and should give you the same result. Apache does that, Nginx does that, Google’s cloud does that, Amazon’s cloud does that, all major sites do that... Caddy considers it irrelevant, and something users should add manually for all of their rules if they want it. Ignoring all the RFCs, because of personal ideals. https://github.com/mholt/caddy/issues/1632 https://github.com/mholt/caddy/issues/1632

Posibyte 9y ago

Exactly. I've heard raving reviews of how amazing Caddy is, but as I said earlier in this thread, the threat of filing trademark violations before even giving time for intent to be reasonably argued feels like a power play to scare the forks. It also makes their "We love Open Source!" claims feel much less genuine. I'm not excited about it as much anymore :\

llao 9y ago

It is worth revisiting the trademark-thread, the responses of everyone involved are level-headed and civil.