I feel left behind

Community
71

Thanks for you words, I feel you man.
I have appreciated all the feedback received so far, trying to answer all questions that came up

We’re not closing anything, we know that such changes need time.
as @danb35 pointed out CentOS EOL forced devs to be fast…
People are free to stay with NethServer 7 for the all the time they like, taking in account that we can’t add new feature or fix things that RH won’t fix.

I try to remind you that we didn’t choose another distro like rocky and alma for technical reasons and we chose years ago not to repeat the same mistake as CentOS, tying ourselves hands and feet to a distribution that could potentially change direction in the future.

That’s why we abandoned the concept of NethServer as a distro and instead embraced NethServer as an application platform.

We’re not rushing things… at the contrary we’re a bit late, considering the reasons mentioned above.

The stable is not stable enough? Ok let’s let’s roll up our sleeves so we can fix what misses.
I think that still looking at the past won’t resolve any problem.

2 Likes
72

@alefattorini I get that, and I think that makes really sense. However I would have opted to take the existing NS7 functionality and convert that functionality in modules onto NS8, especially the core functionality like the basic firewall capabilities. Now one has chosen to create a complete new baby, and leaving virtually nothing behind, thus forcing possibly many into an impossible situation.

3 Likes
73

Debian will always be there and LIBRE.

A man must be big enough to admit his mistakes, smart enough to profit from them, and strong enough to correct them.
John C. Maxwell

This stable was not even an RC, a Beta maybe…
I hope it won’t be the case for the next stable.

Michel-André

74

i beg to differ and disagree with those sentiments.

Building software is hard, building a platform is even harder.

We need to admit that nethserver is not only a software, but also a platform.

As a software, most of the underlying features to get it working i beleiver had been achived, however we must admit a significant feature set had not been implemented, which for the simpler setup could work without.

I beleive i have a geeky setup for using nethserver 7, and will have even geekier setup for nethserver 8 because it adds some functions i need for some clients i support.

a huge number of users used nextcloud for ldap/AD, nextcloud and maybe mattermost. the rest have other things deployed in it.

Now we need to consider and agree that, being a new product, system architecture, and considering different use cases, developers would never have considered all the use cases, users have to actually use the product, experience it to unlock teething challenges.

I would agree, at the moment nS8 is more stable and better than it was during launch, and with release 8.1 some of the feature gaps would be closed.

lets be abit supportive and not constraint ourselves to what was and focus with what is.

there might have been issues at initial launch, are those issues still there?

I also have needs not yet met by ns8, especially for me vpn features and disk management.
overall, there is alot to be done, and alot can be done. should we maintain what was, or can we focus on what can be

2 Likes
75

@alefattorini I appreciate all your feed back.

1 Like
76

@capote have you looked at Control Web Panel (used to be called Centos Web Panel): https://control-webpanel.com/

Not sure if it is simpler than ispconfig as I haven’t looked at that in some years. I actually moved to CWP from ispconfig because of the simplified handling and addition of different PHP versions. I think for that feature you need a Pro license of about $10 per year - worth it.

1 Like
77

Exactly my sentiment I guess. From a complete manageable solution to a ‘patchwork’ jungle of tools where you are on your own to manage, maintain and learn them.

Feels like the 80-ies again.

78

what are we talking about again?

79

As I indicated, this.

80

whats the patchwork jungle of tools?

81

The mess to search/implement additional tools on top of NS8 in TRYING to achieve exactly the same what we already had for many years. Let alone achieve more or better.

1 Like
82

Isnt linux generally a collection of many tools

83

I think quite the opposite @LayLow
I read your other concerns relating to the development of NS8 and believe I understand where you are coming from.
I assume you are wanting an out of the box solution that has all the bits included and managed by a single interface/cockpit/server manager? If so, that is the 80s!
Now it is all about containers and orchestrators and conductors! It is technology that takes a bit of learning and understanding. Once you do understand it, it all starts to point at being the way forward.

I haven’t had the time to have a close, hard look at NS8 - or even use it in a production environment - yet it looks promising and appears to be a good forward moving replacement for the old.
I also like NethSecurity and the way it is going.

I note that you were pushing for it to live on the same machine. In that scenario, if your firewall device gets compromised so does your main server. ‘Air gapping’ machines, functions, modules, etc (even virtually) is a good move these days.

I’m hopeful of seeing NethSecurity loaded onto OpenWRT flashable hardware of sorts.

5 Likes
84

I would hope and wish for this to happen as well, would also give it a wider user base. though not the wifi tuff, since if am not wrong they have been disabled

85

@oneitonitram

A lot of OpenWRT capable boxes are just that: They are capable of running OpenWRT as an access point, nothing more. A lot f available hardware on the OpenWRT list have VERY low powered CPUs, hardly enough RAM to run OpenWRT… And then there are a lot of exotic CPUs (also a lot of single core). Needed libraries will most likely never appear for these exots…

The fact that OpenWRT does support a docker environment is fine, it’s just that the hardware is often too limiting.

To reuse a 10-20 year old box just because it still runs… It does not have the CPU power to run suricata (that needs a lot of CPU). so use as a firewall / vpn gateway is highly limited - anything more hardly usable.

My 2 cents
Andy

86

What I see is that there are many people who are trying to say the same thing, that we come from a polished system and a way of working to a totally new system (with a lot of errors, and yet everything is released as a stable version. … it is not understood, honestly)
You are trying to make us see the benefits of the project, when you are not listening to the cases that are being presented. I honestly don’t see it. I am already looking for alternatives to NS7, since I chose NethServer at the time for a reason. If it no longer meets what I need, I will need to look for other products.
And no, the community was not asked about such a radical change to the system. That has been a business decision. Spot.
What an administrator wants is simplicity. Not that to restart the system I have to do magic spells.
And yes, my comment is being a little more critical than the others, but I only see errors everywhere and trying to shoehorn in the benefits of NS8 (when I see more problems than benefits)
Obviously, you are a company, and companies are there to make money, but you also have to listen to others a little and, if the product you are putting on the market does not convince the public, you should do a little self-criticism, and not limit yourself to repeat and repeat the goodness

2 Likes
87

I’m sorry but I strongly disagree. We have spent tons of time talking about it and there weren’t so many alternatives.

88

Thanks and fair enough.

I am hoping for functionality modularity so that one is free to choose where which module lives, including the firewall, on the same cluster/node or on a different cluster/node.

I am hoping for simple extendible configuration pages for every module, not just the config parameters chosen by devs.

I am hoping for the arch and tech not to discriminate on how MY setup should look like, local or cloud. NS8 is complete build around virtualisation but not intended for virtual setups? How very odd…

I’ve asked in another thread, but the answer was HIGHLY unlikely.

Thanks for the constructive feedback/talk. Appreciated.

89

Never said that. I’m just asking to find the solution together avoiding sarcastic tones.
This not the culture of that community and it won’t be

2 Likes
90

4 posts were split to a new topic: How to migrate my 3 NS7 to NS8