3 ms·
What I love the most about the author's post is the "fork it" part. The author goes out of his/her way to pick out what's wrong with NGINX due to the inadequat
by avenger123 13y ago
What I love the most about the author's post is the "fork it" part.
The author goes out of his/her way to pick out what's wrong with NGINX due to the inadequate SAN infrastructure and at the end suggests someone else fork the project so his/her company can continue to milk the free software of the backs of others.
It's somewhat disgusting.
- ars_technician 13y ago>The author goes out of his/her way to pick out what's wrong with NGINX due to the inadequate SAN infrastructure Wrong. NGINX has recognized this as a problem and discovered apache solved it years ago for a reason. So they decided to play catch-up, but charge for it. >company can continue to milk the free software of the backs of others. >It's somewhat disgusting. That's FOSS. If you don't like it, don't use it. What NGINX is doing is disgusting. The FOSS community actively invested in NGINX via external patches, documentation, bug reports, how-to's, chef-scripts, etc and NGINX is paying everyone back by charging for features.
- avenger123 13y agoI agree with you. If you don't like it don't use it. I don't have any problems with the author's discussion on the issue's with NGINX, but the solution to the problem is not to say its time for a fork and for a better product to come along. That's pretty much an ultimatum type argument and no one likes that. Especially if the author has no stake in the actual development. It's one thing for Linus Torvalds to be abrasive (he's earned the right) versus being abrasive without any real foundation (I didn't get the impression that the author is a strong contributor to the project).