upvote
To me it reads as being worried that someone malicious could step in and use the project's name to do harm. If you don't have someone within the project with trust built ready-to-go, establishing that trust enough to hand over the project is a big task.
reply
I totally agree, that is a huge risk. But what if someone from the postgres team decided to step up and maintain it? I'm not saying that's likely, but it is possible for a very popular tool like this. With the way the project exited now, that would not at all be an option. Obviously if postgres themselves decided to do it, they wouldn't need the previous credibility so this isn't the best example
reply
The Apache Foundation used to step in in this kind of situation, didn't it? Thugh maybe pgbackrest isn't quite big and official enough to be the kind of software which Apache takes on, and one certainly hears (increasing?) grumbles about Apache's stewardship.
reply
If someone really wants to continue the name, they can of course ask the author; maybe they have a compelling case.
reply
From the story told in the README it is clear this is a project ran by a single person. There is no wider maintenance team that can be trusted with continuing the project. So anyone who offers to take up the maintenance will be unknown to the current maintainer and cannot automatically be trusted.

The alternative to this seemingly bitter approach is handing over the trust they built to some unknown person who can do whatever they want with the data in a lot of PostgreSQL databases around the world. I think I prefer the bitterness here over blind trust.

reply
Sure, but what if someone from the postgres team decided they wanted to step up? The door is completely shut for that now. And if we can't trust someone from the postgres team to do it, then who can we trust?
reply
> The door is completely shut for that now.

No, it's not. You can still contact the author and ask them to transfer the name to you.

reply
It can still be forked. There is no salting the ground here. If you maintain the project and have for a long time, and you wish to stop, you can stop.

If no one cared enough to support the project, why does anyone care enough now? It all sounds hollow. Nothing bitter about it.

When you work on a project, any project, you have a responsibility. At some point we all can stop, and become free to not have that responsibility.

reply
I think this is overly harsh. After the guy has been working on the project for such a long period a handover would inevitably be a long process, not least to ensure whoever took over didn't abuse the existing user-base. Completely fair if the existing maintainer doesn't want to take on this work, and arguably a fork forces consumers to properly consider that someone else is in charge now.
reply
See: "It's OK to abandon your side-project (2024)": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47918961 (also on today's frontpage)
reply
deleted
reply