Thread: Citus Data becomes Microsoft
https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2019/01/24/microsoft-acquires-citus-data-re-affirming-its-commitment-to-open-source-and-accelerating-azure-postgresql-performance-and-scale Congratulations on Citus Data! Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa
That is absolutely terrible news. :( Looks like they've taken a leaf from the Oracle playbook. :( :( :( + Justin On 2019-01-25 14:33, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote: > https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2019/01/24/microsoft-acquires-citus-data-re-affirming-its-commitment-to-open-source-and-accelerating-azure-postgresql-performance-and-scale > > Congratulations on Citus Data! > > Regards > Takayuki Tsunakawa
On 2019-Jan-25, Justin Clift wrote: > That is absolutely terrible news. :( > > Looks like they've taken a leaf from the Oracle playbook. :( :( :( Well, isn't this what everyone said about Microsoft buying GitHub? However, nothing terrible seems to have happened to GitHub ... rather the opposite, I think. -- Álvaro Herrera
On 2019-01-25 15:14, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2019-Jan-25, Justin Clift wrote: >> That is absolutely terrible news. :( >> >> Looks like they've taken a leaf from the Oracle playbook. :( :( :( > > Well, isn't this what everyone said about Microsoft buying GitHub? Yes. > However, nothing terrible seems to have happened to GitHub ... rather > the opposite, I think. That's weird. They started introducing "Social Network" features last week, regardless of said features have a negative effect on user focus and attention to detail. :( Also, the reason why I nuked every GitHub repo, gist, and useful star I have. Not just needing to figure out an alternative OAuth provider, before completely deleting the account. Obviously, you have a different opinion. ;) + Justin
From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org] > On 2019-Jan-25, Justin Clift wrote: > > > That is absolutely terrible news. :( > > > > Looks like they've taken a leaf from the Oracle playbook. :( :( :( > > Well, isn't this what everyone said about Microsoft buying GitHub? > However, nothing terrible seems to have happened to GitHub ... rather > the opposite, I think. Yeah. OTOH, I probably feel the same or similar concern as Justin has -- a tough era for independent PostgreSQL providers... AWS, MongoDB, and the Economic Realities of Open Source https://stratechery.com/2019/aws-mongodb-and-the-economic-realities-of-open-source/ Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa
On 2019-Jan-25, Justin Clift wrote: > On 2019-01-25 15:14, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2019-Jan-25, Justin Clift wrote: > > > That is absolutely terrible news. :( > > > > > > Looks like they've taken a leaf from the Oracle playbook. :( :( :( > > > > Well, isn't this what everyone said about Microsoft buying GitHub? > > Yes. > > > However, nothing terrible seems to have happened to GitHub ... rather > > the opposite, I think. > > That's weird. They started introducing "Social Network" features last > week, regardless of said features have a negative effect on user focus > and attention to detail. :( Are you saying that Microsoft is out to destroy open source communities by way of adding features to github that would diminish their abilities to get things done? This doesn't sound like a realistic threat to me. I don't like "social networks" myself, but I can't blame MS for going that route. It's just what young people seem to ask for. Microsoft today doesn't seem Microsoft 20 years ago. > Also, the reason why I nuked every GitHub repo, gist, and useful star > I have. Not just needing to figure out an alternative OAuth provider, > before completely deleting the account. Right, and many migrated to gitlab and other providers; but it seems to me that Microsoft hasn't actually done any harm to those that stayed. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On 2019-01-26 02:16, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Jan-25, Justin Clift wrote:
<snip>
> Are you saying that Microsoft is out to destroy open source communities
> by way of adding features to github that would diminish their abilities
> to get things done?
This conversation is bordering on bizarre. ;)
Microsoft is an organisation which is clearly - from their actions - on
the "evil" side of behaviour. From old RPG-player slang ;), somewhere
between neutral evil and chaotic evil.
On the one hand, they're been making inroads to OSS - after finally
realising OSS really is a more effective better development model than
proprietary (in most cases). On the other hand, they're still pulling
whatever unethical crap they feel is in their best interests, and only
getting away with it either due to the law being slow or their qty of
lawyers:
* Forced upgrades of Windows (seems mostly over now?)
* Forcing telemetry on all users. Still happening.
Note - If you reckon them being told (literally) every time their
users click the start menu isn't a gross violation of personal
privacy, I reckon that's just weird. Some people seem ok with it,
but personally I don't even have words to describe just how far
wrong that is. :(
If you're ok with the PostgreSQL Community falling under the influence
of this kind of organisation, then sure, that's you're opinion.
I **really** don't want us to have anything to do with them though.
They're likely to invest in areas that make sense (which *seems* good),
but will happily screw us over in whatever ways - and make noises to
the opposite effect - that seem to their best interests.
Are they unique in this aspect? Hell no.
We've avoided much of other evil organisations (Oracle springs to mind)
tentacles thus far.
Hopefully the other significant PostgreSQL supporting companies don't
become prey like this. :(
> Microsoft today doesn't seem Microsoft 20 years ago.
As per above, they don't seem different at all.
+ Justin
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 09:46:34AM +1100, Justin Clift wrote: > This conversation is bordering on bizarre. ;) Would you care to tell us why? > On the one hand, they're been making inroads to OSS - after finally > realising OSS really is a more effective better development model than > proprietary (in most cases). On the other hand, they're still pulling > whatever unethical crap they feel is in their best interests, and only > getting away with it either due to the law being slow or their qty of > lawyers: > > * Forced upgrades of Windows (seems mostly over now?) > * Forcing telemetry on all users. Still happening. > > Note - If you reckon them being told (literally) every time their > users click the start menu isn't a gross violation of personal > privacy, I reckon that's just weird. Some people seem ok with it, > but personally I don't even have words to describe just how far > wrong that is. :( Does this one bad behaviour make them an evil organisation per se? One could also see this is one more step to go. There are indeed very positive MS interactions with OSS communities. Besides I don't see your point as far as this group is involved. > If you're ok with the PostgreSQL Community falling under the influence > of this kind of organisation, then sure, that's you're opinion. I might have missed quite a few discussions, could you please point me to some where Microsoft has tried to get PostgreSQL under its influence as opposed to work with the community? > I **really** don't want us to have anything to do with them though. > They're likely to invest in areas that make sense (which *seems* good), > but will happily screw us over in whatever ways - and make noises to > the opposite effect - that seem to their best interests. > > Are they unique in this aspect? Hell no. Quite a few more companies in the larger PostgreSQL ecosystem come to mind that seem to be worse than Microsoft from what I experienced. At least I have never seen Microsoft work actively against the PostgreSQL community. > > Microsoft today doesn't seem Microsoft 20 years ago. > > As per above, they don't seem different at all. I would strongly disagree. There is certainly a huge difference. Have they finished their turnaround? Probably not. But their actions are way better for open open source than 20 years ago. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org Jabber: michael at xmpp dot meskes dot org VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL
On 2019-01-27 01:12, Michael Meskes wrote: <snip> > Does this one bad behaviour make them an evil organisation per se? How about, does their continual bad behaviour - which is extremely well documented over *decades* - of which this is one action... warrant any kind of good will towards them? You're saying they've changed. I'm saying they haven't. Same org, "different clothes" so to speak. ;) + Justin
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 10:48 AM Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> wrote: > On 2019-01-27 01:12, Michael Meskes wrote: > <snip> > > Does this one bad behaviour make them an evil organisation per se? > > How about, does their continual bad behaviour - which is extremely > well documented over *decades* - of which this is one action... > warrant any kind of good will towards them? I don't think this conversation is really helping us figure anything out. I think it's an open question whether Microsoft acquiring Citus is good or bad for PostgreSQL, and I think that question probably deserves some sober reflection, as does the related question of whether Amazon acquiring OpenSCG is good or bad for PostgreSQL, but I disagree that the particular points that you mention answer that question. If Microsoft acquiring Citus is bad for PostgreSQL, it's probably got to do with whether there are viable independent PostgreSQL companies out there that can serve as employers for people who want to get paid to work on PostgreSQL, not whether or not they added social networking features to Github. If it's good for PostgreSQL, it's probably got to do with the value of having really large companies interested in this database that used to be basically the domain of hobbyists but is now big business. Or maybe it's a little of both? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
> On 28 Jan 2019, at 05:17, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > Or maybe it's a little of both? I’m certain that it is, and I’m equally certain that’s one of the core strengths of the project when it comes to acquisitions. The culture of the project is spread so widely over such a diverse group of people and companies that no one company will be able to control it. Hopefully this means that we can get Microsoft to pick up the Schannel patch! =) cheers ./daniel