Hello Mark, On 03/23/2012 05:43 PM, mark.berg...@uphs.upenn.edu wrote: > In the message dated: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 09:20:52 BST, > The pithy ruminations from Kern Sibbald on > <Re: [Bacula-users] [Bacula-devel] new jobs cannot spool until existing jobs > fi > nish despooling?> were: > => Hello, > => > => This is in response to the email from Jesper (see below). As it is > => not always obvious, I am not in the least upset in any way. This is > > I'm glad you stated this so clearly, because, to me, you message below > does sound like you are upset, resentful about the effort you have > expended and the lack of community response, and regretful about some > of the business decisions.
Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt. To reiterate, I am not at all upset or resentful about the time I have put in or the community response. I have stated certain things that I have observed, but that doesn't mean I am upset. From my own personal stand point, I have never contributed cash to any Open Source project, except once to Source Forge, which really is not Open Source, so I didn't and don't expect the the community to contribute cash. As I pointed out, the community has been a *big* help in getting Bacula to where it is, and I am certain that help will continue. > > => meant to be information about our future direction, and more > => directly a response to Jesper's concerns and questions. > > Given that we currently depend on Bacula, I appreciate the information. > > [SNIP!] > > => > => A community member does not need SAN shared storage for > => example -- or if you do and you consider yourself community, that is > => fine with > => me, but you will need an Enterprise contract. There are a *lot* of First no matter what hardware or software you have, you are not in violation of any Bacula license unless you redistribute Bacula and refuse a valid request for the source to the person to who you distributed the code (*extremely* unlikely). The SAN shared storage is a Bacula Enterprise Storage daemon plugin currently in testing with a *big* company in Switzerland. It allows several Storage daemons to use the same autochanger on a SAN. The fact that that plugin exists and you have SAN doesn't in the least connect the two. > > > I need some clarification on this point as soon as possible. > > I am using the Bacula community edition for a small educational research > lab. We have a SAN. We use shared storage. It sounds like you are > saying that we are in violation of the license in some way because of > the hardware in our environment. > > If an Enterprise contract is required, as you state above, then I will > begin to look for an alternative to Bacula immediately, and cease using > the community edition as soon as possible. No an Enterprise contract is not required for anyone. You don't need to look for an alternative. > > The Bacula Enterprise license cost is well outside our budget. > I often hear remarks like that, but I spent 4 years at the University of California, then 6 getting a doctorate at the University of Maryland, then 6 more years teaching and working in the Computer Science Center as a staff member, and so I know that Universities and government agencies spend a *lot* of money on hardware, hardware maintenance, and software (not to mention salaries). It is a question of getting one's need into the budget, which is usually defined once a year. A very reasonable amount of money *is* there if there is a desire and need. Best regards, Kern ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
