This was in response to MinIO/AIStor removing the browser-console UI from the community offering (locking it behind enterprise licensing) a few months back.
Unfortunately, this fork has not developed any traction. It's last commit was 4 months ago basically after the initial fork and instantly became dormant.
I'm not entirely sure how their commercial offering works. It looks like it's a commercial fork of MinIO, but I wasn't able to find anything about assigning copyright for pull requests in their Github. (I didn't look that hard).
But, if the main product is 100% F/OSS AGPL, how are they accepting code from outside contributors and still maintaining a private enterprise offering under (presumably) a different license?
This hitting the front page made me do a web search review what's going on with MinIO, and... turns out it's still 100% F/OSS, released under the AGPLv3.
This is absolutely not comparable to something like OpenTofu, OpenBao, Forgejo, etc. (I guess it's more like recent CentOS forks, like AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux, or whatever.)
Personally, I think supporting it would be regrettable. MinIO is fine.
MinIO has gotten rid of the admin UI from the OSS version and is erasing documentation. Even if they stop here that's enough to need a community fork, but I don't expect them to stop here. Their obvious intent is for the OSS version to only be useful as a trial version of the commercial paid product.
What's up with the naming of rage forked projects?
OpenMaxIO, Forgejo, Valkey, OpenTofu..
Some worse than the others, but still..
Btw, MinIO making these not "open open-source" moves should not be a surprise. Since the beginning, YEARS ago their own CEO, lead people talked in a way it was clear they wanted to follow the Hashicorp book, a few years later they've taken quite a few hundreds of millions in investment.
So let's not be childish, adopt it for what it is and when it happens adapt it for what it is.
OpenTofu is a "best of a bad situation" kind of thing. The project was originally called OpenTF, which makes sense since Terraform config code almost always ends in `.tf`, but HashiCorp sent out the lawyers, so they had to change names. Plus, it goes well with OpenBao, their Vault fork.
I don't get your point about naming. What would you have them named? OpenMaxIO seems different than any of the other ones you listed. They wouldn't have been able to name it OpenMinIO without some legal problems.
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as HBO Max, is in fact, Netflix/Max, or as I've recently taken to calling it, Netflix plus HBO.
Step 1: I made this thing and am freely giving it away for the benefit of everyone. Come join the party!
Step 2: Wow, because this is a community project I can depend on it continuing to exist freely thanks to a large base of diverse parties invested in its continued growth and availability.
Step 3: Just kidding, I'm taking back the thing I made. Sorry if you were depending on it, migrate to something else
or pay me.
I agree with you. But people are allowed to complain, so they're complaining. And the maintainers are allowed to ignore the complaining. Everything is according to the process.
The only notice I have received is from the blowback of their behavior. Walking away from supporting the open source product at any other time than in the wake of a security vulnerability disclosure would have been received better. Sure they're not legally culpable for fixing anything but they're now obviously untrustworthy as a business partner going forwards.
Oh then like I don’t even see the problem. That said I think like a direct notification through email or something is probably better than random blog post, but I digress:
They planned to walk away earlier as I believe I saw its really just unfortunate timing.
If you’re doing business with them you should be on a business license with a contract and legal guarantees. I understand it sucks, but it’s a little bit of a self own imo if you’re only on their oss for business purposes. That also kind of breaks the social contract in the opposite direction imo.
> Oh then like I don’t even see the problem. That said I think like a direct notification through email or something is probably better than random blog post, but I digress:
How would they know your email if you are using minio-oss? Blog post is for sure enough. Decision itself is dumb, it's a public repo with free runners to build images that downloaded 10M times. That behavior is much different how you had to go somewhere else to get OpenJDK binaries.
Maintaining existing build pipeline is nearly zero cost.
I'm not. If they had simply said, "Hey this is getting to be too much work and I don't want to continue anymore. Let me know if you're interested in taking over maintainership of the project." then that's fine. Hell even if they just archived the project and ghosted never to be seen again that's also fine.
It's (yet another) example
of a company donning the trappings of an open source project as a "growth hack" or to secure VC funding and then rug pulling when they decide they want to try and squeeze their user base for cash. They're the corporate stooges that insert themselves into high-trust communities and subcultures to make a buck and ruin it for everyone.
I mean is it though? They've been open source for over a decade thats a really long con I guess.
It’s more likely circumstances have changed. Which is why forking is a thing and you dont have to be oss forever.
I stand by my assertion that this would have been fine if they didn’t communicate like garbage. They should have said what you said and gave a good off ramp period.
> not like they changed anything significant about the product itself
They had already done this months ago, they changed the licence and stripped a lot of the code of their admin UI/object browser. So a lot of the features vanished for people overnight if they updated. This is what the OP is linked to - a fork at the point that they did this. This was work already done, feature already widely in use, they decided to take it out of what was available to the community.
So the product has significantly changed and offering had been reduced. That in addition to the stopping of publishing images - both without notice - caused a decent bit off community 'wtf'.
Unfortunately, this fork has not developed any traction. It's last commit was 4 months ago basically after the initial fork and instantly became dormant.
You can see the list of 'Still alive?' issues: https://github.com/OpenMaxIO/openmaxio-object-browser/issues...
MinIO stops distributing free Docker images - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45665452 - Oct 2025 (499 comments)
But, if the main product is 100% F/OSS AGPL, how are they accepting code from outside contributors and still maintaining a private enterprise offering under (presumably) a different license?
Just let the company fade away..
This is absolutely not comparable to something like OpenTofu, OpenBao, Forgejo, etc. (I guess it's more like recent CentOS forks, like AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux, or whatever.)
Personally, I think supporting it would be regrettable. MinIO is fine.
So you either have to stick to a vulnerable version or have no een UI.
This form seems to target just that. So for the UI kinda similar actually.
OpenMaxIO, Forgejo, Valkey, OpenTofu..
Some worse than the others, but still..
Btw, MinIO making these not "open open-source" moves should not be a surprise. Since the beginning, YEARS ago their own CEO, lead people talked in a way it was clear they wanted to follow the Hashicorp book, a few years later they've taken quite a few hundreds of millions in investment.
So let's not be childish, adopt it for what it is and when it happens adapt it for what it is.
- https://github.com/WedgeServer/wedge
- https://github.com/tmpim/casket
Both forks of Caddy...
(submitted title was "OpenMaxIO is a community-maintained fork of MinIO"; we've replaced it with what the article says, per https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
> This is a fork of MinIO Console.
> JavaScript 75.2%
It seems this is just a community-maintained fork of the minio UI, not minio itself.
Title is misleading if so
Step 2: Wow, because this is a community project I can depend on it continuing to exist freely thanks to a large base of diverse parties invested in its continued growth and availability.
Step 3: Just kidding, I'm taking back the thing I made. Sorry if you were depending on it, migrate to something else or pay me.
Step 4: WTF dude?!
Step 5: Why are you all so entitled?
The only thing they owed people here was a 60 day notice imo. That would better respect the social contract.
The only notice I have received is from the blowback of their behavior. Walking away from supporting the open source product at any other time than in the wake of a security vulnerability disclosure would have been received better. Sure they're not legally culpable for fixing anything but they're now obviously untrustworthy as a business partner going forwards.
They planned to walk away earlier as I believe I saw its really just unfortunate timing.
If you’re doing business with them you should be on a business license with a contract and legal guarantees. I understand it sucks, but it’s a little bit of a self own imo if you’re only on their oss for business purposes. That also kind of breaks the social contract in the opposite direction imo.
How would they know your email if you are using minio-oss? Blog post is for sure enough. Decision itself is dumb, it's a public repo with free runners to build images that downloaded 10M times. That behavior is much different how you had to go somewhere else to get OpenJDK binaries.
Maintaining existing build pipeline is nearly zero cost.
People should begin to think about these externalities. I do.
If you’re using them for business you should probably have a more formal arrangement where they could email you.
It's (yet another) example of a company donning the trappings of an open source project as a "growth hack" or to secure VC funding and then rug pulling when they decide they want to try and squeeze their user base for cash. They're the corporate stooges that insert themselves into high-trust communities and subcultures to make a buck and ruin it for everyone.
It’s more likely circumstances have changed. Which is why forking is a thing and you dont have to be oss forever.
I stand by my assertion that this would have been fine if they didn’t communicate like garbage. They should have said what you said and gave a good off ramp period.
Frankly the whole thing is not newsworthy
They had already done this months ago, they changed the licence and stripped a lot of the code of their admin UI/object browser. So a lot of the features vanished for people overnight if they updated. This is what the OP is linked to - a fork at the point that they did this. This was work already done, feature already widely in use, they decided to take it out of what was available to the community.
So the product has significantly changed and offering had been reduced. That in addition to the stopping of publishing images - both without notice - caused a decent bit off community 'wtf'.