New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Easy way to lose sponsors: "Hey sponsors, we kinda wanna do X, you ok with that?"
no response
"Ok, we're gonna do X"
My guess is that Minio checked out his Twitter, or may have read some of his other brilliance.
And that lost sponsorship was for $5000/year, worth of 50 "user licenses" for $100/year each -- and I bet he will not find 50 actual end-users to sign up and keep paying that -- ever -- for a webserver much slower than nginx, the only saving grace of which is "easy to set up for newbies" AND with the fully free fork (Wedge) widely known and available.
I.e. could have just stayed quiet and attract more corporate sponsors over time, but now the greed for more and now is causing a total failure.
Caddy will end up being a punchline to a nerd joke in XKCD. Countdown to how long began yesterday.
The change has been reverted now
very good post i like it..
End of lowend-open source drama?
The header was removed (because they lost a sponsor due to it, the irony), the restrictive EULA around the binaries still exists. Oh and matt is still a cock.
Traefik looks much better than Caddy with some awesome features: LetsEncrypt, HTTP2, Hot reload, Docker/Kubernetes etc. They even got 1M in initial funding for opensource development. mholt just messed up with his funding strategy.
Matt probably deserved losing a sponsor without communicating clearly to them but he hardly deserves to be name called/treated this way. He is just a grad student.
I have no sympathy for him, he is being a cock plain and simple.
[1]
[2]
and what was posted before.
typical example how to manage "open source" project (as I can see from a couple of projects now) :
1) create community of open source developers to create product "Caddy" web server
2) maintain and remove all the bugs + create various plugins
3) convert to commercial version when the products is perfect
4) restrict the usage and profit from it
haha, jokers
Caddy appears to be rather shitty, I'm still trying to figure out a legitimate use for it - outside of being
a special snowflake"unique".Don't give me this 1-click-install BS either, there are many better performing options out there.
It's basically a solution for a problem that doesn't exist for anyone who is smart enough to not only code, but do basic system administration. Obviously Matt can't handle that.
Im lazy. I liked caddy. But what I liked about caddy the most was the configuration file. Made more sense to me than nginx.conf. Im switching back to apache2 as a backend and nginx/traeffic as a reverse proxy, though.
As all my services are basically for 20 people max, I never really cared about the performance.
Well, there ya go.
But what I liked about caddy the most was the configuration file.
If anyone said they loved configuring Apache, they'd probably say the same about Sendmail.
But, ya know, after the initial pain, it isn't all that difficult.
I'm running Apache w/ PHP-FPM with mod_http2. For what I need, it's virtually instant, and the RAM use isn't bad.
There are plenty "Drop in and run" programs that did precisely what Caddy did, and had similarly-simple configuration. They tended to be Windows based with minimal CGI support, except for some goodies like fhttpd, which evidently got ported to Windows too.
If it was actually all that bad, Id probably stay with caddy, even after this ordeal. But its mostly me being lazy. And with the drama the last two days, my laziness of not wanting to deal with the drama is more than the laziness of not wanting to configure apache/nginx.
apache & nginx are better options anyway
Caddy has reverted the HTTP change at least https://github.com/mholt/caddy/pull/1866. Though doesn't help with commercial licensing debate.
I've started building my own Caddy binaries from source now that the source builds have been fixed by Matt. It's part of Caddy integration into Centmin Mod I am testing privately right now. Plan to integrate a select few web servers including openlitespeed, litespeed and apache 2.4 and maybe h2o (not too fond of the syntax).
status
lol, I add a header within my Caddy integration installer for Centmin Mod but they're removal via Caddyfile vhost configs not forced
integrated plugins
..does it still test at about 33% that of a stockish nginx?
Haven't done proper testing with nghttp2's h2load HTTP/2 HTTPS load tester. But my statement is against my Centmin Mod built Nginx server, not stockish Nginx.
Sounds good @eva2000, but remove your headers as well.
You mean for Nginx or Caddy ? Mine's just for Centmin Mod users and the header is user removable in both Centmin Mod Nginx and Centmin Mod built Caddy binary.
Did some quick benchmarks for siege 4.0.2 and wrk 4.0. Would have to move tests to non-openVZ server for nghttp2's h2load tests as my Docker image doesn't install on OpenVZ server which these tests are on https://community.centminmod.com/threads/caddy-http-2-server-benchmarks.5170/#post-54654
Thanks for the research / testing. I like these benchmarks.
Both. I'd advise you not to take the same route, even if you allow it to be removed, I'd simply do not do it :-).
Other than that, your job has always been pretty awesome.
Well my issue wasn't with the header being added, just the fact that for HTTP/2 based HTTPS performance, Caddy (and h2o) had a performance hit as you added more headers. If Caddy didn't have a performance hit, I wouldn't mind the added HTTP sponsor header. But this is first time using latest Caddy 0.10.9 with Go 1.9 so will have to recheck HTTP/2 HTTPS tests later.
Isn't Minio a free service of some sort?
It is, we're using it and it runs very well, their support @ github is really prompt as well.
General issue here are the headers...
Or that they're forced in Caddy official binaries ? cause every open source web server has an identifying server HTTP header as well - nginx, litespeed and apache. You can generally remove the identifying version number, but the web server itself is still shown in nginx and apache HTTP server header.
They do, but still. Just an advice tho.