>From time to time, someone posts a "you're killing the project" post.
My reply is more a generic reply to those types of posts, which seems to bring up the same points time and time again. Yet the project does not die, the open source project has not collapsed On Mar 23, 2012, at 2:10 AM, Jesper Krogh wrote: > The problem is, I dont think there is a single person on this planet > running bacula in an non-Enterprise context. The amout of work, > hardware and time needed to run > a decent backup system with tapes and autochangers (which > is the corner where Bacula is truly awesome), is highly > overlapping with the enterprise segment, so the money is there. One point, which I think is rather important… This is incorrect. Many people run Bacula in non-Enterprise contexts. But I suppose that term is subjective and open to interpretation. I am running Bacula at home. Not everyone uses tapes and auto changers at home. But I do. Based on what I've see on the list, this is not uncommon. > Now you ask yourself: "What the hell is this dude's problem?" Yep. He's telling the people doing the work how to do it. That happens on open source projects on a regular basis. It's fairly common in fact. It just needs to b dealt with calmly and without lurking the project in a sudden new direction because of criticism. > The problem is, had I evaluated Bacula for out setup today, > compared to 7 years ago. I dont think Bacula had won! Everyone is free to come and leave as they wish. > The one true strength Bacula has compared to commercial alternatives > is the viral community on this list, that creates a true trust in the > software > that a lot of smaller commercial alternatives can't compete with. > > The smaller and more restricted the "Open" version becomes, the > more this trust is sacrificed along the way and in the end it is "only" > the pricetag that differes to the commercial alternatives. And, sorry, > even though Bacula is cheaper it is going to loose this one big-time. It's not becoming smaller and more restricted. It is not the only thing the differs with respect to commercial applications. People aren't moving to Bacula solely because of cost. Posts to the users mailing list support that. > In a Backup solution in enterprise context, the price of the software > itself is only one component of the one-to-one comparison and the > commercial alteratives are going to beat the shit out of Bacula on a lot > of others, and the Enterprise version is "looking more and more" like > "Just another commercial alternative". Yes, it's hard to complete with big funds. But we're doing it. So are many other open source projects. > So, please, keep an eye on it, dont silently kill of the Open Source > version. I think this statements needs to be reevaluated. Nothing of the sort is happening. > A proposed middleground is: > > * Try to seek funding for the features, instead of restricting them. That happens. On a regular basis. > * Push harder on what you are truly good at, support and services. Umm, wow. Now you're telling the business what to do. :( In short: what has been said is often said regarding open source projects which have a commercial arm. However, there is more work than workers. The best way to change the situation is to do some work. Or pay to have it done. -- Dan Langille - http://langille.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
