3 ms·

Hi Matt! I've been using and advocating for Caddy for a while now, but I have to say this is a huge put-off. Don't get me wrong here, I'm in full support of a

Hi Matt! I've been using and advocating for Caddy for a while now, but I have to say this is a huge put-off. Don't get me wrong here, I'm in full support of a commercial version... but as you can see from the feedback here, this kind of thing is really frowned upon in the personal / OSS space for a variety of reasons. I encourage you to re-consider added headers. Perhaps look at a more heavy handed download process such as the "Pay as you want" system used by ElementaryOS's download page (https://elementary.io/ https://elementary.io/).

mholt 9y ago
Thanks for your comments. I think that this thread can be added to the bucket of all the others that reveal the unhealthy expectation in the FOSS community, and I'm not convinced that the "variety of reasons" are compelling. It's regrettable that our announcement today is so controversial. As much as a donation model is easy and safe, it is not a business plan. (We tried it.)
- zzzcpan 9y ago
  Maybe there is no big enough market for what Caddy is offering right now. Have you considered pursuing other directions, make it really diverge from nginx, apache features and stand out? Maybe more into an out of the box security solution with integrated scraping protection, ddos protection, vulnerability scanning protection, exploit protection, overload protection, xss/csrf protection, WAF features, full-page caching. Or even into an edge infrastructural solution for hosting companies and such, with dns management and everything.
- tylersmith 9y ago
  "the unhealthy expectation in the FOSS community" Nobody is "expecting" you to make good software, we're just saying that now that you've turned a formally mostly decent piece of software into adware with an untrustworthy author there's no reason to not just use better software. Software that doesn't molest your traffic. I wish you luck with your business but don't know why anybody would pay for software written by you two ever again.
  - kyledrake 9y ago
    You don't think you're being a little melodramatic here? We're talking about a change to a Server header. Nginx doesn't let you remove their server header either, and their business model is to restrict access to important functionality on nginx now. Do you think that's a morally better approach?
    - tylersmith 9y ago
      We're talking about adware modifying traffic to pester you into licensing. The nginx model of selling additional features is in fact much better.
      - kyledrake 9y ago
        It only advertises to people hitting your site with curl or looking at the HTTP headers, so basically sysops guys curious about what your stack is. Actual end users will almost never see it. So what? We switched to OpenResty lately for our nginx bundle and it changes the nginx Server header to OpenResty, and I cared so little I didn't even bother to put a sed command in our install script to change it. It could say Diet Pepsi Uh Huh It's The One.. who cares? Maybe I'm going to do that with the next update just to make a point. The only reason anybody would even notice is because I told them about it. FOSS is in serious trouble right now because the funding model is in shambles, and the only way we get anything good funded now is if the megacorps decide to fund something. We need to find better ways for the little guys to put food on their tables, or we're doomed as a community. We tried direct payments to FOSS devs, and that went up in flames. These guys came up with a clever and unintrusive way to advertise (really just to show sponsors, which isn't really even advertising) to tech people, and instead of being supportive of a novel way to fund their project everybody screams bloody murder at them. If the FOSS community wants to continue to exist as a venue for quality software, the first step it needs to take is to stop chewing its own arms off. Please have a perspective here and understand that these developers are just trying to make a living, just like all of us are. The only thing worse than starving to death making something free for other people is doing it while they sit there and hate you for trying to figure out how to put food on the table. All the quality people will leave FOSS forever, and we'll be stuck with a bunch of random unmaintained garbage and bizarro overengineered UI crap Facebook wants to publish to status compete with Google's bizarro overengineered UI crap, and we'll all be worse off for it.
- NuSkooler 9y ago
  To be clear, I'm not advocating for a donation model instead of a free personal use vs paid commercial. I'm suggesting to remove the header and urge personal users to donate a bit. > and I'm not convinced that the "variety of reasons" are compelling. I really don't want to be a jerk here, but you don't need to be convinced. If the general community feels a certain way, and you wish for said community to favor you, you must abide.

mholt 9y ago

Thanks for your comments. I think that this thread can be added to the bucket of all the others that reveal the unhealthy expectation in the FOSS community, and I'm not convinced that the "variety of reasons" are compelling. It's regrettable that our announcement today is so controversial. As much as a donation model is easy and safe, it is not a business plan. (We tried it.)

zzzcpan 9y ago
Maybe there is no big enough market for what Caddy is offering right now. Have you considered pursuing other directions, make it really diverge from nginx, apache features and stand out? Maybe more into an out of the box security solution with integrated scraping protection, ddos protection, vulnerability scanning protection, exploit protection, overload protection, xss/csrf protection, WAF features, full-page caching. Or even into an edge infrastructural solution for hosting companies and such, with dns management and everything.
tylersmith 9y ago
"the unhealthy expectation in the FOSS community" Nobody is "expecting" you to make good software, we're just saying that now that you've turned a formally mostly decent piece of software into adware with an untrustworthy author there's no reason to not just use better software. Software that doesn't molest your traffic. I wish you luck with your business but don't know why anybody would pay for software written by you two ever again.
- kyledrake 9y ago
  You don't think you're being a little melodramatic here? We're talking about a change to a Server header. Nginx doesn't let you remove their server header either, and their business model is to restrict access to important functionality on nginx now. Do you think that's a morally better approach?
  - tylersmith 9y ago
    We're talking about adware modifying traffic to pester you into licensing. The nginx model of selling additional features is in fact much better.
    - kyledrake 9y ago
      It only advertises to people hitting your site with curl or looking at the HTTP headers, so basically sysops guys curious about what your stack is. Actual end users will almost never see it. So what? We switched to OpenResty lately for our nginx bundle and it changes the nginx Server header to OpenResty, and I cared so little I didn't even bother to put a sed command in our install script to change it. It could say Diet Pepsi Uh Huh It's The One.. who cares? Maybe I'm going to do that with the next update just to make a point. The only reason anybody would even notice is because I told them about it. FOSS is in serious trouble right now because the funding model is in shambles, and the only way we get anything good funded now is if the megacorps decide to fund something. We need to find better ways for the little guys to put food on their tables, or we're doomed as a community. We tried direct payments to FOSS devs, and that went up in flames. These guys came up with a clever and unintrusive way to advertise (really just to show sponsors, which isn't really even advertising) to tech people, and instead of being supportive of a novel way to fund their project everybody screams bloody murder at them. If the FOSS community wants to continue to exist as a venue for quality software, the first step it needs to take is to stop chewing its own arms off. Please have a perspective here and understand that these developers are just trying to make a living, just like all of us are. The only thing worse than starving to death making something free for other people is doing it while they sit there and hate you for trying to figure out how to put food on the table. All the quality people will leave FOSS forever, and we'll be stuck with a bunch of random unmaintained garbage and bizarro overengineered UI crap Facebook wants to publish to status compete with Google's bizarro overengineered UI crap, and we'll all be worse off for it.
NuSkooler 9y ago
To be clear, I'm not advocating for a donation model instead of a free personal use vs paid commercial. I'm suggesting to remove the header and urge personal users to donate a bit. > and I'm not convinced that the "variety of reasons" are compelling. I really don't want to be a jerk here, but you don't need to be convinced. If the general community feels a certain way, and you wish for said community to favor you, you must abide.