Right, but that doesn't really explain anything. Maybe the author is concerned about some future changes in the nginx project and they're preemptively moving away from NGINX, but even if that's the reason, it's not much of one. If they're using the open source version of NGINX, then it seems highly unlikely anything will change that will impact them.
I don't find that satisfactory. They don't have to explain themselves at all, but it would be nice know why the F5 purchase would charter that decision. Also if the F5 purchase makes you want to leave nginx, why lighttpd? They don't have to answer either question, but we can still say it would be nice to have it explained.
The article is extremely clear on this point:
They were in the middle of a lighthttpd -> nginx transition and noticed that lighthttpd has now fixed whatever caused the transition to start.
Like all acquisitions, this one creates uncertainty, so they backed out the nginx deployment.
This seems totally rational on their end. Why fix what is not broken, and why depend on two things when you can depend on one?
> There are some FreeBSD machines in our infrastructure which run NGINX. After the recent announcement of the F5 purchase of NGINX we decided to move back to Lighttpd.