Hello,
im a new user of the bacula software. Im a member of the systems engineering
department of a telco operator on Europe, and my first encounter with this
software was related to an implementation of an automatic backup software for
all the systems that we are in chrge of. I found it on specialized forums, and
decided to try it on a lab. This was one of the best decisions that i have made.
First i want to say that is an impressive software. In the version we have
tried (not the latest) it nearly do as much things as a corporate will want to
do to remain on the market..... and for free.
The second is that one of the things that move me to develop a lab to test this
software is that it was free of charge, a thing that most of their
"competitors" dont. It was a mayor point, because one of the most important
thing of a company is to reduce the costs related to maintenance.
I understand you when you say that you need funding to make the project go on,
but im a bit dissapointed with the fact that you will want us to pay for the
use of the software. Ill explain:
- What we understand with open software is that it is open, that is, anybody
willing to use it can use it.
- In the fact that you need funding, the right way is to ask for "donations".
This will remain valid as long as the project remains "small".
- The case you have is that you do a lot of work to provide binaries, and
people does not "donate" the amount you need to support the project. System
operating licenses are not free.....
- Other thing is that the binaries you support are not to all the OSs that
people use out there, that is, i think that almost everybody will compile their
own binaries (except for windows, i thin) for their oss. Personally, we use AIX
and HPUX (and others...), oss that you dont provide a binarie for them.
>From the point of view of the customer, if you want users like me (im not a
>user now, but we are planning to use your software) to pay for the use of the
>software, one of the major thing that move us to use the software (the fact
>that is free) will go away, and there are other commercial software that do
>the same that your software do, and have much more experience doing marketing
>of their products.
What i want to say is that if you want to, please put a fee on the support of
the software, that is, online fixing problems, answering customer questions,
etc, not on the use of it. Im glad to say that im willing you to grow up this
company, and give us support on the future releases of the tool, but at a
reasonable fee......:).
Again, its an impressive software.
Regards.
-----Mensaje original-----
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Kern Sibbald
Enviado el: lun 16/07/2007 19:38
Para: Alan Brown
CC: bacula-beta, ; bacula-devel; bacula-users
Asunto: Re: [Bacula-users] [Bacula-devel] Bacula BETA 2.1.26 released
toSource Forge
On Monday 16 July 2007 18:08, Alan Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Kern Sibbald wrote:
>
> >> I hate to say this, but history shows that it usually leads to a
great
> >> deal of shouting and hatemail from the peanut gallery.
Well, I am not too worried about the shouting from the peanut gallery.
I
don't read it any more because I realized that the criticism that is
fair
gets through to the bacula-devel list, and the unfair (IMO) criticism
is
written by people who don't take the time to understand the problem or
the "proposed" solutions.
> >>
> >> Kern, how many hours/how much cost is involved in validating the
Win*
> >> binaries?
>
> This was actually a genuine question. We don't even use Win*
binaries,
> however knowing what kind of funding is needed to keep the project
going
> makes it somewhat easier to obtain it....
It hard to estimate the cost with validating the Win* binaries.
Probably it is
a few thousand dollars per year of out of pocket expenses. If you
include
the time an effort put into it, it is probably $10,000 - 20,000 per
year.
The donations to the Bacula project were not even covering my out of
pocket
expenses, which have amounted to about $8,000 per year since January
2000.
>
> > My take on this is that the Bacula project has been supplying a lot
of
> > binaries (i.e. a lot of work and a service), corporations,
Universities,
and
> > governments are saving 10s and even 100s of thousands of dollars in
license
> > fees in using Bacula, and certain of those establishments are
becoming
rather
> > vocal about wanting high end features, but they are not willing to
spend
even
> > 1 cent of the money they save on license fees to support the
project.
>
> I think that this will be a good thing and will enable you to obtain
> funding - quite frankly, if there had been an entity available to
provide
> invoices for support and licensing 5 years ago we would have gladly
paid
> up.
>
> Coporates and Universities will not be the ones doing a lot of
shouting
> and screaming. For the most part they will _gladly_ pay for support.
The
> stumbling block up until now has been one of invoicing.
Yes, I understood that some years ago, but I don't think the Bacula
project
had matured enough to provide professional services until recently,
what
really woke me up was when I learned that Bank Austria-Creditanstalt
uses
Bacula :-)
>
> As you know MSSL been offering to provide some (limited) funding for
> features, however the lack of a support structure as you appear to be
> unveiling has been a major sticking point in getting funding released
> towards the project - what we've put forward is literally all that's
been
> able to be made available locally without having to get approval from
> higher powers.
Yes, I do know, and it should be possible within the next 6 months.
>
> Many university and corporate IT departments will easily find
themselves
> in similar situations. Without a legal entity to deal with it is
nearly
> impossible to get approval to spend money (This is why so many
companies
> can make good money selling opensource products...)
Yes.
>
>
> As I said, what worries me is a large amount of negative publicity
from
> the "peanut gallery".
>
> In opensource terms, the "Peanut Gallery" are the _very_ vocal groups
of
> people who scream from the hilltops that all software should be free
of
> charge, etc etc etc.
>
> What worries me is extremely strong press and hatemail coming from
the
> likes of SlashDot and similar arenas as a direct reaction to an
> announcement that Bacula is no longer available in binary form and is
> moving to commercial support.
Having lived through the Howdy Doody (sp?) Peanut Gallery days in my
youth, I
am quite familar with it.
If they want to scream and holler, they are probably going to do
nothing but
increase the popularity of the project. I don't plan to read any of
their
comments.
What I am planning is what most successful project have done or are
doing, but
I am doing it will what I consider a much more fair twist, and it the
critics
don't realize that, then so be it. My more fair twist involve several
elements:
1. Individual users, charities, and contributoring companies will be
able to
obtain the binaries for free. Only "enterprises" will have to pay.
2. The people providing the binaries will receive some renumeration
(currently
they receive none).
3. There will likely be more binaries for more distros than previously,
and
they will be tested.
4. There is no conflict with distros or other users who wish to create
their
own binaries or even release them. I'm not trying to restrict
anything.
5. Unlike other projects the copyright for the code is held by FSFE.
6. Corporations which have support contracts will automatically have
access to
the binaries without extra charge.
7. Since there is quite a lot of work involved in preparing and testing
binaries, it is only fair that enterprises pay for them. The licensing
will
be a flat fee for each platform binary (no fees for the number of
copies used
or servers/clients, ...).
8. No one is obligated to use our binaries.
9. Any profits from this will go back into code development (frankly I
doubt
there will be any profits). So that no one is confused, the profits,
if any,
of the service company will be shared with the founders and employees,
but
rather than pricipally flowing to the shareholders, it will principally
flow
to the workers (providing we can make it self funding rather than
having
Venture capital).
>
> (For origin, please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_gallery )
>
> > Any money obtained will be put back into developing Bacula features
and
paying
> > a small renumeration to the people who create the binaries.
>
> This is A VERY GOOD THING!
Yes, it is overdue, but not currently possible.
>
>
> PS: Kern - My director asks "Please mail us asap for details of what
kinds
> of fee structures are envisaged and how we can be invoiced."
OK -- to follow in a few hours off-list.
>
> PPS: Please review that decision about the binaries. It will generate
a
> lot of unnecessary adverse publicity. Those who want to pay for
support
> are quite likely to be already forming a line. (See the history of
Pegasus
> Mail. Free cost software+Paid support is definitely ecoonomically
viable)
My view is that if you can afford to pay and you are saving gobs of
money by
using the product, you should pay. Clearly individuals and charities
either
cannot afford to pay or are not saving any money so they benefit from
what we
are setting up as they have previously.
Regards,
Kern
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Antes de imprimir este e-mail piense bien si es necesario hacerlo.
*********
Este mensaje es privado y CONFIDENCIAL y se dirige exclusivamente a su
destinatario. Si usted ha recibido este mensaje por error, no debe revelar,
copiar, distribuir o usarlo en ningún sentido. Le rogamos lo comunique al
remitente y borre dicho mensaje y cualquier documento adjunto que pudiera
contener. El correo electrónico via Internet no permite asegurar la
confidencialidad de los mensajes que se transmiten ni su integridad o correcta
recepción. JAZZTEL no asume responsabilidad por estas circunstancias. Si el
destinatario de este mensaje no consintiera la utilización del correo
electrónico via Internet y la grabación de los mensajes, rogamos lo ponga en
nuestro conocimiento de forma inmediata.Cualquier opinión expresada en este
mensaje pertenece únicamente al autor remitente, y no representa necesariamente
la opinión de JAZZTEL, a no ser que expresamente se diga y el remitente esté
autorizado para hacerlo.
*********
This message is private and CONFIDENTIAL and it is intended exclusively for its
addressee. If you receive this message in error, you should not disclose, copy,
distribute this e-mail or use it in any other way. Please inform the sender and
delete the message and attachments from your system.Internet e-mail neither
guarantees the confidentiality nor the integrity or proper receipt of the
messages sent. JAZZTEL does not assume any liability for those circumstances.
If the addressee of this message does not consent to the use of Internet e-mail
and message recording, please notify us immediately.Any views or opinions
contained in this message are solely those of the author, and do not
necessarily represent those of JAZZTEL, unless otherwise specifically stated
and the sender is authorised to do so.
*********
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
