Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

According to the public statements, F5 is committing to maintain the current level of resources NGINX has allocated to their open source programs, to keep the same dev team involved, to keep licensing as it currently is, not change any of the repositories on Mercurial and GitHub and to keep the NGINX brand.

Which only means that NGINX will get even better over time.






Every company that has ever acquired anything says this exact same thing. Then the deal closes and it’s back to bottom line numbers.

In this case how does f5 make or lose money from Nginx?

I guess this[1] image from the F5 article gives an idea of where nginx fits from their perspective. F5 is a huge company (4000~ employees) that already likely has thousands of boxes running nginx. If you're going to continue using nginx as a critical piece of your business you might as well secure its future.

[1]: https://www.f5.com/content/dam/f5-com/page-assets-en/home-en...


> committing to maintain the current level of resources NGINX has allocated to their open source programs

What are the contractual consequences if they don't keep that commitment? If the answer is "none", then it's not a commitment.


I’ve seen that a lot of times. What I haven’t seen a ton of is the acquired company still existing 5 years later.

Which is an interesting statement given that everyone I've run into associated with F5 - local reps or users - have been relentlessly hostile to "open source crap".

NGINX was already paywalling bug fixes once they launched Pro.

proxy_pass for example will only resolve a hostname at the time the configuration is parsed, unless you use a convoluted variable hack. This was a serious issue requiring you to restart your fleet if a backend server changed IPs. The bug fix for this was implemented only in Pro and sold as "DNS for Service Discovery."


Put a load balancer between your reverse proxy and your backends. Problem solved.

What do you think nginx was being used for?

How’s Apache doing these days? Haven’t looked in a while

Nowhere near as fast with concurrent connections.

That is simply untrue. Apache 2.4.x w/ the Event MPM is just as fast and actually has lower latency. That FUD has long, long since been disproved.

Hopefully if it declines we can have a MariaDB type fork take it's place.

nginy?

But yeah, hopefully the community around it is solid enough to make that a possibility. I'd really prefer to not go back to Apache...


Pronounced "en-genie", with an oil lamp as the logo?

Incrementing all letters : "nginx" => "ohjoy"

You win

Oh boy do I have a bridge to sell to you!



Applications are open for YC Summer 2019

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: