On 04/25/2014 03:49 PM, compdoc wrote:
>> I keep hearing talk of "old community code" which makes it sound like the
>> Win32 support has become proprietary.
> It does sound as if Bacula will eventually become the world's hardest to
> install, pay-for backup solution. Not that I blame Bacula for going closed
> source: money is a strong motivator.
Bacula is 100% open source. Bacula Systems has an Enterprise version
that is not open source nor is it closed source as a number of Bacula
Systems customers have the source code.
I personally created Bacula Systems with zero interest in making money,
and though I currently have a salary, it is by my request ridiculously
low -- even the cleaning people (no joke) are paid more than I am.
However, please understand when a company employees people, it is
expensive. Without Bacula Systems, I would no longer be working on
Bacula (I use the term Bacula to mean Bacula community), I would be
fully retired. So for the Bacula community, Bacula Systems is ensuring
the future of Bacula and has even guaranteed that in writing. With such
a guarantee, though I call Bacula Systems an open-core company, we are
really an open-core+ company.
Without me, which will be sure the case in a few years, the only options
will be:
- Hope what I setup with Bacula Systems continues, which I am about 99%
sure it will at least for the next 10 years.
- Use one of the several forks of Bacula
- One fork that has existed for quite a while now, is what I would
call a friendly fork, but the objectives of that fork are very different
from the objectives of Bacula. The author has a lot of good ideas.
Some of his code has also been taken (with no reference to the author)
by and put into the fork I mention in the next point.
- The other more recent fork is viable, but a very large amount of
the code going into it (much less that what Bacula Systems has already
given to the community, and much less that what Bacula Systems is
producing today and will go back to the community) would never make it
into Bacula.
I will write a blog item in the next month or two about (in my view) why
it is so hard to attract developers for Bacula, and in more particular
that all the "big" projects have either a foundation with multiple big
sponsors behind them, or a for-profit company behind them. The is as of
yet no large open source project that has become the next RedHat, and I
doubt there will be one. Even RedHat is not really an open source
company. I once argued with a prominent person in the Free Software
Foundation; me saying that RedHat was an open source company and him
saying no. I now agree with him. I am not complaining in the slightest
about RedHat in making that statement.
>
> However, I think without open source Windows clients people won't take the
> considerable time it takes to learn how to install Bacula, and they will
> turn to other solutions.
If you are talking about developers and very small companies, and the
typical open source enthusiast, I agree. If you are talking about medium
to large enterprises, I can assure you that you are not right. For most
of them the only other solution is "commercial" software, which come at
a price of at least 5 times that of Bacula.
For small companies and people, I am working on solutions, but they take
time since I have to use Bacula Systems resources (I am only one person)
and working in the small company, home user market segment in backup is
difficult to cover costs. My first step in making Bacula easier for
"little users" will be to produce free binaries with repositories and
instructions how to make the installation go easily. I am also working
on what I call Quickstart (similar to Kickstart but more generic), but
all this takes time and costs someone money.
>
> Compiling and maintaining the client must take a lot of work, but hasn't the
> community provided free testing and bug reporting all these years and made
> Bacula what it is today? That should be worth something.
Yes, that is worth a lot to me, and Bacula is still there and it is
getting better, and as you read above, I am trying to go in the
direction you suggest, but probably not as fast as you would want.
I would state the issue differently. The community has gotten a lot of
benefit from Bacula largely because of my personal commitment over the
last 14 years and my commitment to assure its future. Why not be happy
for what you have received? No one is profiting off what the community
helped produce, and since you are a computer service company (or at
least your email address is at one), you are free and welcome to profit
from Bacula.
>
> Looks I'm going to be using 5.2.13 for a long time...
That is your choice. Though I don't understand why you don't use 7.0.x
That version still and will continue to support older File daemons --
you don't have to buy or pay for anything.
Best regards,
Kern
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> _______________________________________________
> Bacula-users mailing list
> Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
|
