I’m not sure what you mean by the “core of NS8.” The VM images they’re providing, at least right now, are on Rocky, not Alma. I believe it will run equally well on any EL9 clone (or on EL9 itself), but naturally haven’t tested this. But it installs (and runs, so far as I’ve tested it) without issues on Debian 12 as well. As @schulzstefan has pointed out, NS8 requires podman, which is a RH project, but it is of course available for Debian as well, and no doubt other distros as well.
Hi @Andy_Wismer,
So bye bye small offices, newbies, junior admins…
Only Pro will be able to use this brand new OS with its new containers architecture.
Then if so, I’m sure they will wait until this new OS has proven itself before implementing it.
Michel-André
1 Like
I don’t really think so…
To this day, a great majority of NS / SME users still don’t understand the e-smith template system, and are puzzled why after a reboot the config in /etc reverts to something older…
These people use NethServer (NS7) as Dan says, like a black box.
Some people had a really good idea of what was going on behind the scenes in NethServer.
Some just had a foggy inkling
Others even, had hardly a clue: “It does mail…” 
Yet for most of the above, NethServer 7 worked!
And still does…
My 2 cents
Andy
1 Like
Thank @danb35 @Andy_Wismer to put counter ideas here.
Yes NS8 is a new product with a new architecture and new stuffs make fears
I recall to have read Charlie brady around 2014 where I were fully involved in the SME Server that virtualization brings complexity and makes harder restoration in case of broken OS
What to understand of that. Yes IT is moving and yes you must adapt yourself
Relevant to what I read here we have people of the community that wants to leave the boat because they are too many development in NethServer.
Just awful from a developer point of view
Sorry I do not get you
Firewalld is the key. You could trigger any valid command but since we have no gateway firewall feature planned I guess you won’t have an UI to do it
This is planned in the firewall part of nethsecurity or use opensense/pfsense/ipfire…
1 Like
Salut Stéphane!
Yes, I also recall Charlie having “bouts of senility” in public years ago.
And I still maintain that using virtualisation makes for far easier and faster disaster recoveries than any native install directly on hardware.
My 2 cents
Andy
No. Personally I like new things. But as older you get and more experiences you have, as more you will be very careful when it comes to far-reaching decisions.
AFAIK Charlie is still alive (on koozali last activity July 14, 2019, 10:52:39 AM). Or Ian Wells. Feel free and ask them about the structure of NS8. They’ll be polite enough to give you an opinion. If you appreciate.
Yes. I understand totally and with full respect for the work and ideas for NS8 of all devs.
But a part of the “market” does not feel comfortable with ideas out of an ivory tower (not my words, someone else used this phrase already.) It has to be a together from the very start of new products between the expectations from the market and the skills and theoretical possibilities from a development point of view. AFAIK the needs for R&D are coming from the market. At least as it’s not like an invention like the telephone or the telefax.
Is there a poll in the community - not a poll between the devs - what improvement the market would appreciate as successor from NS7?
The risk driving this way? Loosing customers.
On the other hand - the risk being overtaken on the sidelane. Means for customers living in the past and missing improvements.
Now, great efforts have already been made to NS8. Countless hours from devs and testers were done. IMPO it must not happen, that NS8 fails to the market. My appeal would be to listen carefully to the concerns of the so called customers and try, wherever it’s possible, to improve or make it easier.
Last words - if NS8 is meant to be SME, then take a very close look to the SME customers and users. WHO is using SME, and WHAT FOR are SME installations in the field used, and WHO is the sysadmin for the classical SME installation/network. I remeber @alefattorini started a poll. Are there any results?
Or you have to find new customers and users for NS8. Which per se is surely also possible. And legit.
1 Like
I would suggest being careful underestimating even partime sysadmins and “so called” SME users. If you allow.
1 Like
Hallo @schulzstefan
Not underestimating - don’t forget, I’m also one of those answering questions here, and these Template questions are often asked…
I think MrMarkuz and other supporters here can confirm this too!
There are also plenty who just need a few tips how it works, and they do what is needed.
My 2 cents
Andy
1 Like
May you allow me my very humble and insignificant point of view: don’t make the mistake trying to play with the big players. You will need tons of resources and money, money, money to stay on the field. If you make a mistake, you’ll sink or you’ll getting eaten. Try to swim in your bathtub. In case carrying a swim ring can help. This is meant for me and my core business I’m living from.
1 Like
It’s more than 20 years ago, we need to move forward. Don’t you think?
I confirm that NS is not a classical SME distro. It’s an application server platform built upon a distro.
We’re not going too far away from SME, because most of our clients and users are SME, for Nethesis and the NS project wouldn’t be a smart move
We’re just giving a new tool container-based to SMEs market, cloud-ready, and fully compatible with a hybrid scenario.
No, we’re not going on public cloud. With NethServer 8 you can create your private cloud, your own data and users. It’s the opposite. BTW Ns8 will work pretty well on bare metal and hypervisor, so… what are we talking about here?
I hope you will change your mind
That’s a great comparison Andy thank you 
2 Likes
Charlie has left the boat of SME Server when the project was not able to make SME 10 and he pushed Mitel to go his way with Mitel server on centos7, sure it has been a heartbreak for him
Ian Wells with all my respect because he pushed me to be a developer is working for Microsoft mswellsi (Ian Wells) · GitHub https://www.linkedin.com/in/ianawells/
I think he will positively see code is moving on the NethServer project with cloud minded
Man, we’ve been developing this project with this community since 2015 and all our code is on github. It looks far away from an ivory tower
That discussion is another example that it won’t happen
We have tons of discussion on that. Please take a look, it’s not just a poll
@schulzstefan thanks for your point of view but please we can’t stay here to discuss again the NS8 direction but test and improve it along the way.
We tried to explain the core values of the project over and over again, I hope it’s clearer now.
4 Likes
With that approach, you are bypassing the whole backup concept within NS8 by a solution from your hypervisor. That seems like a valid workaround. But if that is the solution, why does the backup function in NS8 exist in the first place?
1 Like
The “suggested” work-around is just that.
Even if I rely on Proxmox PBS, I still use the built-in Backup of NthServer (Or whatever platform).
I even do a Proxmox Backup to NAS in addition.
All also Offsite, daily synched.
Always better to have a backup too many, than one to little!
I’m also well covered for a Cryptolocker attack!
My 2 cents
Andy
May I iron some kinks here?
Cloud for NethServer8 is… wrong. Simply wrong.
Because if any adopter is wishing to use NS8 also outside from the network, in a public accessible space needs to buy hosting or housing if it’s wishing to be picking on hardware. Just like NS7.
Please Alessio, cloud is a incorrect word as environment because any sysadmin can know exactly where the metal (virtual or physical do not matter) is and who’s mantaining it. That’s what the company is paying for.
Ball is in Nethesis court, Alessio. As community manager you can collect the feelings of the adopter, refine that and polish, then forward to the developers who are not here to feel the vibe. The structure of NS8 has been decided from development team, a lot of feedbacks and critics/doubts/analysis came here, but the ship had already left the pier.
Now IMVHO two things could be done (not mutually exclusive)
- listen to the critics. This do not automatically mean that project must steer for every doubt and dissatisfactory feedback, but if any detailed complain is dismissed as “it’s not like that”… the feedback will be harsher and less understanding
- go for the route that Nethesis and Nethesis customers set. Consider that if not pleasant or fit enough for the adopters, the open source/access version of NethServer could lose a lot of the traction
For the Ivory tower… Alessio it’s quite tough evaluation, and you can feel that unfair. However someone felt like it, when decisions are taken while feedback has been provided. It’s not the same size, height, sturdiness of IBM/RH. However… someone felt like that.
For anyone unsatisfied about the current status of the project:
- It’s no eSmith/SMEserver/Shorewall anymore. Deal with it.
It’s sad, I would love to have both roles like NS7 but now it’s not. - Project is not in final state
I stopped considering NS as viable platform several months ago, because the project is different and both roles (firewall and server) currently are note satisfactory to me. I was not comfortable starting on both roles for new projects because of the short support time for NS7 and not mature enough status of NS8.
This will be still unsatisfactory to me when final? I don’t know, yet. However I won’t go full NS8 at release date, not willing to be a beta tester for at least 6 months. Probably “beta tester” will feel bitter for developers, however the paradigm shift from Module/service to Module/containter is not a version upgrade, is a new product. It’s understandable that will take more time to rewire, solve, fix issues and missing pieces.
Last but not least: if file server will be a module granular recover for single file is mandatory. And not only for file server module. Otherwise, if the developers cannot provide the right interface, drop the module and take the blame for not providing a upgrade path.
4 Likes
When doubts are expressed and they are interpreted as fears or a desire to jump the boat, it sounds like the response of a cult guru.
My reply would be the same as the one from Stefan M. Schulz:
Michel-André
E-smith, Server & Gateway. Install and forget. That is where we came from and indeed for East Timor and area’s alike. To help the lesser admin skilled organisations/people to enter the digital world.
NS8 in its current state is nothing like that anymore today. And yes NS8 was announced and plans were made. But there was no public decision making process, for after all Nethesis is the ‘owner’ and very important the sponsor.
Indeed things change but in what direction? We have the RH debacles, we had SME Server debacles and we will encounter other challenges in the future. SO what is the future stable path. I don’t know.
What I do know for myself is that I would like to see NS8 have the core capabilities of a ‘Server and gateway and install and forget’. Meaning including manageable strict firewall capabilities, for many will only use 1 node for every functionality. That NS8 has the capabilities to grow to many nodes would/is fantastic, but, in my view’ should not leave out the lesser admin gods and core functionality of being a gateway and server.
E-smith, SME Server and NS7 were pure love, NS8 is a nice tool.
Then again, I could not decide on the roadmap, it was presented to me as a fixed path. But MAYBE the DMU’s can lean towards the philosophy whilst adopting, maintaining and adhering to new technologies. 2 different things…
Nevertheless, I think this thread is a very healthy discussion and brings a lot of POV’s, visions and idea’s. It shows respect, maturity and professionalism. I thank you all for that!
My2C
3 Likes