FYI https://wasmcloud.com/blog/2025-04-23-statement-on-nats/
Readit Newscaniszczyk commented on Protecting NATS and the integrity of open source cncf.io/blog/2025/04/24/p... · Posted by u/tomncooper
And who funds the Linux Foundation? - it is the CSPs themselves - https://chatgpt.com/share/67587e4c-bde8-800b-9f0a-fc824d3d6f...
Any thoughts on CSPs making money from open source projects while the open source developers (e.g., Redis, Mongo, Hashi) suffer)?
No one organization in the world funds the LF in a way that is more than 1% of the total LF revenue... it has nearly ~2000 members across the world. You can usually get some of this from the LF Annual Report: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/resources/publications/linux...
Reading about Keycloak and how long it is taking to patch critical vulnerabilities, I wonder is CNCF becoming how Apache was - where abandoned open source software goes to die.
Last I checked, Keycloak has increased in activity since joining CNCF...
https://keycloak.devstats.cncf.io/d/1/activity-repository-gr...
CNCF has probably 20x the funding of the ASF and is a different organization that spends millions of dollars on security audits, events and more, you can read about it in our annual report: https://www.cncf.io/reports/cncf-annual-report-2023/
Also we actively remove/prune projects that aren't active... we will probably archive ~10 this year https://www.cncf.io/project-metrics/
I hope that OpenFeature changes the feature flagging space the same way that OpenTelemetry impacted the o11y space, we are overdue for this (in my biased opinion)
caniszczyk commented on CockroachDB license change cockroachlabs.com/enterpr... · Posted by u/Cwizard
> IMO, it's not really open source if its run by a company that will eventually use its position to squeeze its users for cash.
I know it's not as popular or sexy as it used to be, but the whole point of a foundation like Apache was to avoid these situations, even more than the way the Linux Foundation is setup. Apache _explicitly_ manages projects to avoid these downsides.
- Single corporation ownership. Projects cannot get out of the Incubator unless they demonstrate a diverse and healthy community. That doesn't mean popular, it doesn't necessarily mean best-in-class, but it means that there shouldn't be just one entity backing a project.
- Membership in Apache is _personal_ not a seat for a given company. If you're a committer on an Apache project and you move jobs, you're _still_ a committer on that project
- The Foundation owns the trademarks. There have been fights about this in the past, but the whole idea is that the _community_ owns the name, so some corporation can't claim to be the sole or official owner by naming their company or product after the open source product.
The core premise of the Apache Software Foundation is community over code, that healthy, diverse communities have a better chance of standing the test of time than open source projects backed by a single individual or company. That's the thesis at least.
The is starkly different from several other foundations, notably the Linux Foundation or Eclipse Foundation which are modeled more around industry consortiums.
Both models have their place, but I believe Apache better models the core values many of us feel strongly about when it comes to free and open source software.
Apache isn't a silver bullet... there are plenty of Apache projects where the individuals are compromised mostly from one company and hide behind the veneer of the ASF... where they are working on the projects per their employment. Gerrymandering is definitely possible and has happened in the past, that's why you have to look at governance and ownership of the marks/build systems etc: https://www.aniszczyk.org/2019/10/08/open-source-gerrymander...
I actually prefer the approach of LF, EF or CNCF where it's transparent where folks work for and your affiliation is disclosed upfront. In the CNCF for example, we separate out technical project decisions (maintainers) from funding decisions (members). That is healthier than blending it all in one at the ASF imho and having no idea where person is working for imho.
caniszczyk commented on How we migrated onto K8s in less than 12 months figma.com/blog/migrating-... · Posted by u/ianvonseggern
I’m baffled to see so many anti-k8s sentiments on HN. Is it because most commenters are developers used to services like heroku, fly.io, render.com etc. Or run their apps on VM’s?
Hating is a sign of success in some ways :)
In some ways, it's nice to see companies move to use mostly open source infrastructure, a lot of it coming from CNCF (https://landscape.cncf.io), ASF and other organizations out there (on top of the random things on github).
At a quick glance, they seem significantly different.
https://ai-infra.fun/ contains things like OpenAI & Anthropic under the LLM section.
I don't see that on https://landscape.lfai.foundation/. Also, I don't see a space for Code or IDE tooling the Linux Foundation page. ai-infra.fun contains TabNine and Tabby.
Would things like TabNine and Tabby make sense on the Linux Foundation one? Would love to collaborate on this!
It could! I've been pushing them to expand the LFAI landscape to be broader, I'd reach out to https://www.linkedin.com/in/ibrahimhaddad/ who owns the LFAI landscape.
some serious community work will be needed
FYI there's an LF AI Landscape which basically duplicates a bit of this work
https://landscape.lfai.foundation
They have graduated levels like CNCF :)
FYI there's an LF AI Landscape which basically duplicates a bit of this work
https://landscape.lfai.foundation
Would love to collaborate with the author of this as I help run CNCF/LF landscape infrastructure.
Why is planetscale making release notes for vitess - a google project
Vitess is an open source and openly governed CNCF project