[HN Gopher] Leaving Facebook/Meta was the best thing we could do...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Leaving Facebook/Meta was the best thing we could do for the
       community
        
       Author : electrum
       Score  : 95 points
       Date   : 2022-08-02 20:16 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (trino.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (trino.io)
        
       | password4321 wrote:
       | TIL or xkcd.com/1053 "lucky 10,000'd":
       | 
       | > _Presto, a distributed SQL query engine for big data analytics_
       | 
       | > _we were forced to rebrand and changed the name to Trino_
        
       | bitsondatadev wrote:
       | I'm curious to know if this is anyone's first time hearing about
       | Trino?
        
         | thatguy0900 wrote:
         | I've never heard of it. Im not a programmer, though I read
         | hacker news daily.
        
         | biztos wrote:
         | I had heard of Presto, vaguely, but not Trino.
         | 
         | It's certainly an interesting choice of name!
         | 
         | Should you say "TRY-no" to rhyme with Rhino or "TREE-no" to
         | rhyme with Arduino?
         | 
         | I would do the latter, but I'm a debauched expat. My guess is
         | that half the people in America will do the former.
         | 
         | Because I overthink this stuff I had to go see what's on
         | trino.com and it's an impressively old-school unfinished
         | personal website.
        
         | MonkeyMalarky wrote:
         | Not trino, but yes for Presto. But it was already confusing
         | because there are/were two Presto projects with one being a
         | fork of the other?
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | Not to mention the name of the opera rendering engine.
        
           | bitsondatadev wrote:
           | Yeah, I think that was one of the reasons why Facebook
           | enforcing the trademark ended up being a blessing in
           | disguise. It at least made the forks clearer. Now Trino is
           | gaining more momentum but it takes a while for the brand
           | recognition to set in I suppose.
        
       | biztos wrote:
       | > Engineers at these highly competitive companies must create
       | memorable work, or they will not get the promotions they deserve.
       | 
       | If everybody gets promoted because of "memorable" work, maybe
       | nobody actually deserves the promotions, and they're just handed
       | out at the whim of whoever remembers your work?
        
         | dan-robertson wrote:
         | I think memorable just means that there is some artefact of the
         | work, eg some thing in the user interface or some committed
         | code or report or whatever.
        
       | cmrdporcupine wrote:
       | _" Feedback from these engineers ultimately culminated in the
       | managers making the decision to give automatic contributor rights
       | to any Facebook engineer working on Presto, so that these
       | engineers could move faster."_
       | 
       | I'm confused -- does Facebook not have similar code review
       | infrastructure as Google, etc. That is: nothing -- I mean
       | _nothing_ -- gets  "contributed" at Google without it going
       | through code review.
       | 
       | Were FB engineers able to commit directly without review? Or is
       | it that they were given some kind of "owners" privilege to fast
       | track reviews? This all sounds bad.
        
         | micromacrofoot wrote:
         | There's code review, and there's "code review" where there's a
         | deadline and someone says "can you click approve on this real
         | quick," which is essentially a direct contribution with a
         | compliance dance. I've seen it at large companies like these on
         | several occasions.
        
         | dsundstrom wrote:
         | We ran Presto directly on Github (I think it still does), so
         | everything went directly to the project without a private
         | internal review first. We designed it this way, so that
         | everyone in the community could participate in the full
         | process.
        
         | bitsondatadev wrote:
         | Facebook has their own internal reviews for their own internal
         | projects and forks of open source projects. I think the issue
         | came down to Facebook adding anyone working on the project to
         | have the ability to merge code to the open source project.
         | 
         | Typically if a company wants to contribute to open source, you
         | have to create a PR and have it be reviewed and merged by the
         | maintainers of the open source project on top of internal
         | review. Facebook management decided to circumvent that process.
        
           | radicality wrote:
           | I spent many years at FB, but no longer there, but that
           | doesn't even sound like a 'special case'? Every engineer at
           | Fb has access to pretty much all the code, and after an
           | internal code review for your code change, you can get it
           | committed to the internal repos. For open source things,
           | something syncs the external and internal changes ocassionaly
           | I think. I imagine the problem here was that now external
           | people can't comment on internal PRs etc.
           | 
           | I even remember some of my internal commits making it into
           | FBs open source code on GitHub, even though at the time I had
           | no idea that this specific area of FBs codebase is open
           | source.
        
             | billjings wrote:
             | I worked at FB, too, and I can confirm you speak the truth.
             | 
             | This process is problematic, though. The "special case" is
             | the standard process at FB: to make external contributors
             | second class citizens.
             | 
             | They have their reasons, but doing this pushes the locus of
             | discussion and action to the place where work happens
             | fastest: inside the company. That means that the interests
             | of FB engineers drive the project; in other words, not
             | open.
             | 
             | That argument is I'm sure open to some logical nitpicking.
             | But the evidence speaks for itself: Facebook open source
             | projects aren't responsive to the outside community, and
             | they language when FB's priorities shift. So their strategy
             | has been pennywise, pound foolish in my view: they get the
             | short term benefits of an "open" project, but they're
             | incapable of actually being good open source custodians.
        
         | kmonsen wrote:
         | Facebook/Meta does not have owners, so any two people in the
         | company can land a change.
        
       | ruler88 wrote:
       | why did Presto got renamed to Trino? so confusing...
        
         | neilv wrote:
         | According to https://trino.io/blog/2020/12/27/announcing-
         | trino.html , because of trademark registration and enforcement
         | by Facebook.
         | 
         | (IMHO, PrestoSQL also looked maybe a little too much like
         | PostgreSQL in this space.)
         | 
         | I'm imagining an unusually efficient brandstorming session.
         | "OK, folks, idea hats on, there are no bad ideas... we've got
         | Presto..." "Uh... _new_ Presto... New-o... " "Neutrino..."
         | "Trino?" "Trino!" "Searching it now!"
        
           | dsundstrom wrote:
           | If only it were that easy. It took ages to find the new name.
           | There is a Google doc somewhere with pages of bad names.
        
           | bitsondatadev wrote:
           | Hah! It may have very well looked like that given the time
           | constraints they were working with.
        
         | CydeWeys wrote:
         | This is answered in the linked article.
        
         | bitsondatadev wrote:
         | Here's the renaming article that clarifies this...
         | 
         | https://trino.io/blog/2020/12/27/announcing-trino.html
         | 
         | Months after this consolidation, Facebook decided to create a
         | competing community using The Linux Foundation(r). As a first
         | action, Facebook applied for a trademark on Presto(r). This was
         | a surprising, norm-breaking move because up until that point,
         | the Presto(r) name had been used without constraints by
         | commercial and non-commercial products for over 6 years. In
         | September of 2019, Facebook established the Presto Foundation
         | at The Linux Foundation(r), and immediately began working to
         | enforce this new trademark. We spent the better part of the
         | last year trying to agree to terms with Facebook and The Linux
         | Foundation that would not negatively impact the community, but
         | unfortunately we were unable to do so. The end result is that
         | we must now change the name in a short period of time, with
         | little ability to minimize user disruption.
        
       | nineinchnick wrote:
       | I love seeing there are people dedicated to keeping open-source
       | projects like Trino alive, ready to make some hard decisions.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-08-02 23:00 UTC)