3 ms·
Ultimately, they selected CockroachDB, as described in "RFD 110: CockroachDB for the control plane database" [1]. Now, published just yesterday, "RDD 508: Whith
by willbicks 2y ago
Ultimately, they selected CockroachDB, as described in "RFD 110: CockroachDB for the control plane database" [1]. Now, published just yesterday, "RDD 508: Whither CockroachDB?" [2] discusses what to do in light of Cockroach going proprietary.
[1]: https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0110 https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0110
[2]: https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0508 https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0508
- cybrexalpha 2y agoI'm getting increasingly nervous about baking in assumptions on software that doesn't have a strong guarantee of staying open source. Foundations like the CNCF help here, where projects are assigned ownership to the foundation. There is a middle ground though. It's not practical to only build on top of foundation-owned software. So a metric I use these days is to consider the cost of replacement or fork maintenance, combined with how likely I think a license change would be, as part of evaluation.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 2y agoEven with the CNCF badge there is no guarantee. See the sketchy ownership semi scandal over Linkerd
- Pet_Ant 2y agoEven with the Apache foundation therenis no guarantee they’ll be maintainers for support and active development. Only guarantee is a company that is profitable but doesn’t want more money…
- pjmlp 2y agoMaybe people should be getting nervous that the whole flower power mentality of FOSS doesn't really scale when there are bills to pay, and families to nurture.