←back to thread

MinIO stops distributing free Docker images

(github.com)
672 points LexSiga | 6 comments | 22 Oct 25 06:17 UTC | HN request time: 0.311s | source | bottom
Show context
Tepix ◴[22 Oct 25 09:12 UTC] No.45666563[source]▶
It's an Open Source project - I don't understand what people are complaining about. Noone is entitled to receive free Docker images. I'm sure if there is enough demand, someone else who is trustworthy will step up and automate building them.

What I'd like to complain about instead is the pricing page on the Min.io webpage - it doesn't list any pricing. Looking at https://cloudian.com/blog/minios-ui-removal-leaves-organizat... it seems the prices are not cheap at all (minimum of $96,000 per year). Note that Cloudian is a competitor offering a closed-source product.

replies(20): >>45666657 #>>45666766 #>>45666806 #>>45666929 #>>45667098 #>>45667178 #>>45667201 #>>45667203 #>>45667286 #>>45667401 #>>45668228 #>>45668656 #>>45668714 #>>45668719 #>>45669554 #>>45670644 #>>45670900 #>>45671464 #>>45673127 #>>45674773 #
weli ◴[22 Oct 25 09:42 UTC] No.45666766[source]▶
When you always published and built Docker images for the public you are creating an expectation, people will rely on that and will chose your software based on that expectation.

You suddenly deciding that you won't be offering updated Docker images especially after a CVE and with no prior notice (except a hidden commit 4 days ago that updated the README) is approaching malicious-level actions.

If they truly cared about their community and still wanted to go through the decision of not offering public docker builds the responsible thing to do is offer a warning period, start adding notices in the repo (gh and docker) and create an easy migration path, even endorse or help some community members who would be fine with taking care of the public builds of the image.

But no, they introduced the change, made no public statement about it, waited for someone to notice this, offered no explanation and went silent. After a huge CVE. Irresponsible.

replies(10): >>45666850 #>>45666888 #>>45666945 #>>45666962 #>>45667042 #>>45667291 #>>45667585 #>>45668545 #>>45670863 #>>45676669 #
arghwhat ◴[22 Oct 25 10:09 UTC] No.45666962[source]▶
There is absolutely nothing malicious or suspicious about deciding not to provide docker images or binaries. Doing so does not hide or guard you against CVE's, which are entirely unrelated to such optional processes.

Building minio is not only trivial, but is standard procedure - the latest release is in my distributions standard package repo, and they would not use prebuilt binaries. If you want that dockerized, the Dockerfile is shorter than the command-line to run said container. Dealing with Docker themselves, the corporation that has famously gone on a tax collection spree, is however quite the pain in the arse for a company.

I can't stand the entitlement people (everyone, not one particular person) feel when they are provided things for free. Sure, minio is run by a corporation these days and this applies a bit more to smaller FOSS projects, but the complaint is that the silver spoon got replaced with a stainless steel one. You're still being fed for free, despite having done nothing for it.

</rant>

replies(4): >>45667096 #>>45667127 #>>45667330 #>>45672871 #
1. 1dom ◴[22 Oct 25 11:04 UTC] No.45667330[source]▶
> I can't stand the entitlement people (everyone, not one particular person) feel when they are provided things for free.

Does it make you less frustrated to remember that humans are pattern recognition machines and our existence is essentially recognising and adapting to patterns, and so when someone does something repeatedly - regardless of if they're doing it for free - humans will recognise a pattern and adapt to it.

This is an inevitable consequence of coexisting with humans: if someone does something repeatedly, it creates an expectation. This is how learning works. If someone stops doing something, people are going to mention the consequences of their expectation not being met. Framing that as entitlement doesn't seem productive, especially in situations like this where it looks like the change wasn't properly communicated.

I don't think there can be a world where humans are able to learn/adapt/be efficient whilst not having expectations.

I believe there could be a world where people don't get pejoratively labelled as entitled for expressing the inconvenience caused by having functionality removed.

replies(3): >>45667546 #>>45668053 #>>45668451 #
2. dorian-graph ◴[22 Oct 25 11:34 UTC] No.45667546[source]▶
Why not talk about other parts of coexisting with humans? Parasitical relationships, having to learn and adapt, communicating your needs instead of making assumptions, etc.?
3. Propelloni ◴[22 Oct 25 12:30 UTC] No.45668053[source]▶
Funny that pattern recognition does not extend to the universal pattern of "things end". A stoic would be appalled--if they'd care.
4. arghwhat ◴[22 Oct 25 13:02 UTC] No.45668451[source]▶
> Does it make you less frustrated

No. There is no valid justification, and the suggestion otherwise suggests a lack of understanding of what exactly these rude individuals are demanding.

The very least people can do when receiving such quite extensive voluntary favors and dedication from others is to be polite and show proper gratitude and appreciation. Otherwise, they are not worth the personal and uncompensated sacrifice of time (a quite non-renewable reosurce) and personal health required for the support. They are not even worth the stress or brain cycles required for communication.

(Not saying there aren't plenty of people showing appreciation - otherwise we would have given up on FOSS entirely a long time ago - just talking about those that don't)

replies(2): >>45671179 #>>45676327 #
5. 1dom ◴[22 Oct 25 16:02 UTC] No.45671179[source]▶
> No. There is no valid justification, and the suggestion otherwise suggests a lack of understanding of what exactly these rude individuals are demanding.

Like I said, the fact that people are human, and that minios did a thing repeatedly, is why the expectation is there. Saying it's not justified is like saying the sky isn't justified being blue, getting upset and frustrated about it is even more silly.

There's no need for people to be rude, I agree, but I don't really see any people being disproportionately rude in their comments, especially in the context of a provider who pulled part of their provisions without fair warning.

6. kbelder ◴[22 Oct 25 23:11 UTC] No.45676327[source]▶
They are also, by complaining, incentivizing other people to not even offer free services in the future. Why set yourself up for accusations that you're 'breaking your social contract' or whatnot?