Bacula Status Report

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bacula Status Report

Kern Sibbald
Hello,

I would like to speak to you about the following points:

1. The rumors of the death  of Bacula (the Community version)
2. The Bareos fork of Bacula
3. Bacula Systems and the FSFE (Free Software Foundation Europe)
4. The future of Bacula (the Community version)

1. The rumors of the death of Bacula (the Community version):

I borrow words from a quote of Mark Twain: The rumors of the death
of Bacula are highly exaggerated! 

I began working on Bacula 14 years ago (in January 2000), and it has
been Open Source from the time it was publicly released in April
2002, and it will remain Open Source.  I have been and am fully
devoted to Open Source, and in particular to Bacula, which is like
my “baby”.  So to hear rumors that Bacula is dead or that I have
withheld commits because they are Enterprise features is shocking
and hurtful to me as well as not true.

I did inform the Bacula Community several years ago that my personal
participation in Bacula would decrease a bit for several years to
allow me to focus more on getting Bacula Systems started.  In my
opinion, that has not been a serious disadvantage for the Bacula
project since Bacula Systems over that period has contributed far
more code to Bacula than I could have alone over the same period,
and as you will see a bit later in this status report, Bacula
Systems contributions are absolutely guaranteed to continue in the
long run, and even increase.

2. The Bareos fork of Bacula:

The Bacula repository has been on “hold” since our last release
in early February, because on 27 February 2013, I learned that there
was a fork of Bacula made by a former “consultant” of Bacula
Systems with a former reseller of Bacula Systems.  Unfortunately,
despite the fact that Bareos hired one of the best German Open
Source lawyers , there were a number of serious copyright violations
with their code.  Since the Bacula code is copyrighted by the Free
Software Foundation Europe (FSFE), I provided the technical support,
and the FSFE worked with Bareos to clean up their copyright
violations.  That took a significant amount of time (many months),
and the Bareos code though significantly improved is still not
totally free of copyright infringements.  I won't go into the
details here as all of you may not be interested, but will have much
more to say about Bareos in later blogs, and when the blog is setup
I will let you know.

I find Bareos an unusual fork, because it wasn't done in what I
believe to be the normal Open Source way.  Normally a fork is made
when a project is blocked or has serious disagreements with the
users.  Its also normally done in open communication rather than
underhanded or in secret.  In the case of Bacula, though some of the
development slowed down (I will go into this in detail later), it
certainly was by no means stopped.  To complain about active
development in Bacula Systems, is, in my opinion, incorrect first
because adding features to the Enterprise version costs Bacula
Systems a lot mostly in salaries yet takes absolutely nothing from
Bacula.  In fact, when you read the next section, you will see that
the more that Bacula Systems develops, the more features that Bacula
over time will have.  Going back to what I find abnormal about the
Bareos fork is that they claim that they spent three years
developing a lot of new features, thus they are more feature rich
than Bacula.  Yes, for the moment, they have a few features that
Bacula does not yet have, but not for long, and more importantly
over the three years of development of those features they never
offered these new features to Bacula nor to any Open Source project.
Instead they were developed in secret.  I find that a very strange
behavior for a self-proclaimed Open Source company (actually, they
are “forced” to be Open Source because of the Bacula AGPLv3
license).  So as Bacula contributors and users, you would be within
your rights to feel very upset with Bareos, because they never
offered you the code they developed.

I assure that I will do all in my power to ensure that any
worthwhile features that Bareos implements will be implemented in
Bacula, and most likely better integrated and more robust, and where
possible with even more functionality and growth potential.


3. Bacula Systems and the FSFE:

If you have been a long time Bacula user you may recall that I
discussed the possibility in 2006-2007 of creating a company, now
called Bacula Systems, to ensure the continuation of Bacula when I
will no longer be able to personally contribute – say in 10 or 20
years, as well as to provide the financial means to add high-end
features to Bacula (a fibre channel network costs about $50K to
setup).  Much to my surprise 95% or more of the responses I got were
very positive.  Bacula Systems was created in July 2008, and for the
first two years, the Enterprise code base and the Community code
base were identical.  Unfortunately, that didn't work financially
for Bacula Systems.  Companies willing to pay, were willing to pay
for features and support but not support alone, so Bacula Systems
embarked on development to continue maintenance and improvement of
Bacula while at the same time creating mostly plugins to add
differentiation to the Enterprise version.

Now this may not sound very Open Source to you, and I understand,
because I feel the same way.  Were it at all possible, I would give
you all of Bacula Systems code, unfortunately, that is not
economically feasible at the current time, and yet without Bacula
Systems, I fear the Bacula project will die or worse yet fall into
the hands of someone incapable of maintaining the high quality we
have created.

While I was consulting with the Free Software Foundation Europe
(FSFE) on the Bareos copyright violations, Bacula Systems and I
began discussions with the FSFE on how to guarantee the long term
survival of Bacula.  These discussions, extremely positive on both
sides and all points, recently lead to a formal written agreement
between myself, Bacula Systems, and the FSFE. There are a number of
points in the agreement, but probably the most important of all is
that Bacula Systems has now put in writing that it is an Open Source
company (at its heart), as it has always proclaimed, and will
contribute all the Enterprise code it creates to the Bacula
Community code base within at most a 5 year period.  One exception
is that Bacula Systems is legally unable to contribute certain code
encumbered by third party proprietary license.  The 5 year delay
gives Bacula Systems the chance to develop Enterprise features that
differentiate it, but ensures the continual growth of the Bacula
Community code.  This model can possibly be used across the industry
to ensure the future of open source software in an environment where
development costs, particularly for hardware to do testing, are
prohibitive to the standard models of today.

5. The future of Bacula (the Community version):

If you have read section 4 above, hopefully if you were not already
convinced that Bacula is alive that you can now see that it will
have a long and successful future ahead of it.  If you have any
doubts, please do not hesitate to either send me an email on the
bacula-users list or directly to me (if you want it private).
Hopefully, by mid-December I will have a blog setup (need a major
upgrade of bacula.org to do so), and I will then fill you in on the
details of the Bareos fork as well as more details on what next to
expect in Bacula.

Thank you for contributing to and/or using Bacula ...

Best regards,
Kern

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing
conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bacula Status Report

nitmd
This post has NOT been accepted by the mailing list yet.
In response to Kern's comments today:  

I have had an inactive bacula installation for awhile, things broke, things got busy, etc. I was getting back to reinstalling it and ran across a lot of information that made me wonder whether it was worth reinstalling and whether bacula community was dead.  I started looking at bareos or another backup, so I'm glad to have found this posting.

It's good to hear that the community edition is not dead. One thing I did run across was some information about me surely knowing the windows binaries are no longer produced, which I had no information about and couldn't find anything about why or what the issue was.  I found a link that seemed to allow me to buy the windows items; since I backup windows machines I assumed I would need that, but then bareos seemed to have this stuff as a part of the package.  I am NOT a system administrator, just a person backing up a couple computers.

So I would like to hear about the windows backup in light of your comments on the rest.  Thanks.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Bacula-announce] Bacula Status Report

Davide Franco
In reply to this post by Kern Sibbald

Thanks to YOU Kern for bringing such a good open source backup solution to the community.

And thanks for this status update, it give us more detail on what we already know ... Bacula project is still alive.

Best regards

Davide

On Nov 25, 2013 5:50 PM, "Kern Sibbald" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello,

I would like to speak to you about the following points:

1. The rumors of the death  of Bacula (the Community version)
2. The Bareos fork of Bacula
3. Bacula Systems and the FSFE (Free Software Foundation Europe)
4. The future of Bacula (the Community version)

1. The rumors of the death of Bacula (the Community version):

I borrow words from a quote of Mark Twain: The rumors of the death
of Bacula are highly exaggerated! 

I began working on Bacula 14 years ago (in January 2000), and it has
been Open Source from the time it was publicly released in April
2002, and it will remain Open Source.  I have been and am fully
devoted to Open Source, and in particular to Bacula, which is like
my “baby”.  So to hear rumors that Bacula is dead or that I have
withheld commits because they are Enterprise features is shocking
and hurtful to me as well as not true.

I did inform the Bacula Community several years ago that my personal
participation in Bacula would decrease a bit for several years to
allow me to focus more on getting Bacula Systems started.  In my
opinion, that has not been a serious disadvantage for the Bacula
project since Bacula Systems over that period has contributed far
more code to Bacula than I could have alone over the same period,
and as you will see a bit later in this status report, Bacula
Systems contributions are absolutely guaranteed to continue in the
long run, and even increase.

2. The Bareos fork of Bacula:

The Bacula repository has been on “hold” since our last release
in early February, because on 27 February 2013, I learned that there
was a fork of Bacula made by a former “consultant” of Bacula
Systems with a former reseller of Bacula Systems.  Unfortunately,
despite the fact that Bareos hired one of the best German Open
Source lawyers , there were a number of serious copyright violations
with their code.  Since the Bacula code is copyrighted by the Free
Software Foundation Europe (FSFE), I provided the technical support,
and the FSFE worked with Bareos to clean up their copyright
violations.  That took a significant amount of time (many months),
and the Bareos code though significantly improved is still not
totally free of copyright infringements.  I won't go into the
details here as all of you may not be interested, but will have much
more to say about Bareos in later blogs, and when the blog is setup
I will let you know.

I find Bareos an unusual fork, because it wasn't done in what I
believe to be the normal Open Source way.  Normally a fork is made
when a project is blocked or has serious disagreements with the
users.  Its also normally done in open communication rather than
underhanded or in secret.  In the case of Bacula, though some of the
development slowed down (I will go into this in detail later), it
certainly was by no means stopped.  To complain about active
development in Bacula Systems, is, in my opinion, incorrect first
because adding features to the Enterprise version costs Bacula
Systems a lot mostly in salaries yet takes absolutely nothing from
Bacula.  In fact, when you read the next section, you will see that
the more that Bacula Systems develops, the more features that Bacula
over time will have.  Going back to what I find abnormal about the
Bareos fork is that they claim that they spent three years
developing a lot of new features, thus they are more feature rich
than Bacula.  Yes, for the moment, they have a few features that
Bacula does not yet have, but not for long, and more importantly
over the three years of development of those features they never
offered these new features to Bacula nor to any Open Source project.
Instead they were developed in secret.  I find that a very strange
behavior for a self-proclaimed Open Source company (actually, they
are “forced” to be Open Source because of the Bacula AGPLv3
license).  So as Bacula contributors and users, you would be within
your rights to feel very upset with Bareos, because they never
offered you the code they developed.

I assure that I will do all in my power to ensure that any
worthwhile features that Bareos implements will be implemented in
Bacula, and most likely better integrated and more robust, and where
possible with even more functionality and growth potential.


3. Bacula Systems and the FSFE:

If you have been a long time Bacula user you may recall that I
discussed the possibility in 2006-2007 of creating a company, now
called Bacula Systems, to ensure the continuation of Bacula when I
will no longer be able to personally contribute – say in 10 or 20
years, as well as to provide the financial means to add high-end
features to Bacula (a fibre channel network costs about $50K to
setup).  Much to my surprise 95% or more of the responses I got were
very positive.  Bacula Systems was created in July 2008, and for the
first two years, the Enterprise code base and the Community code
base were identical.  Unfortunately, that didn't work financially
for Bacula Systems.  Companies willing to pay, were willing to pay
for features and support but not support alone, so Bacula Systems
embarked on development to continue maintenance and improvement of
Bacula while at the same time creating mostly plugins to add
differentiation to the Enterprise version.

Now this may not sound very Open Source to you, and I understand,
because I feel the same way.  Were it at all possible, I would give
you all of Bacula Systems code, unfortunately, that is not
economically feasible at the current time, and yet without Bacula
Systems, I fear the Bacula project will die or worse yet fall into
the hands of someone incapable of maintaining the high quality we
have created.

While I was consulting with the Free Software Foundation Europe
(FSFE) on the Bareos copyright violations, Bacula Systems and I
began discussions with the FSFE on how to guarantee the long term
survival of Bacula.  These discussions, extremely positive on both
sides and all points, recently lead to a formal written agreement
between myself, Bacula Systems, and the FSFE. There are a number of
points in the agreement, but probably the most important of all is
that Bacula Systems has now put in writing that it is an Open Source
company (at its heart), as it has always proclaimed, and will
contribute all the Enterprise code it creates to the Bacula
Community code base within at most a 5 year period.  One exception
is that Bacula Systems is legally unable to contribute certain code
encumbered by third party proprietary license.  The 5 year delay
gives Bacula Systems the chance to develop Enterprise features that
differentiate it, but ensures the continual growth of the Bacula
Community code.  This model can possibly be used across the industry
to ensure the future of open source software in an environment where
development costs, particularly for hardware to do testing, are
prohibitive to the standard models of today.

5. The future of Bacula (the Community version):

If you have read section 4 above, hopefully if you were not already
convinced that Bacula is alive that you can now see that it will
have a long and successful future ahead of it.  If you have any
doubts, please do not hesitate to either send me an email on the
bacula-users list or directly to me (if you want it private).
Hopefully, by mid-December I will have a blog setup (need a major
upgrade of bacula.org to do so), and I will then fill you in on the
details of the Bareos fork as well as more details on what next to
expect in Bacula.

Thank you for contributing to and/or using Bacula ...

Best regards,
Kern

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing
conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bacula-announce mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-announce


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing
conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bacula Status Report

Silver Salonen-5
In reply to this post by Kern Sibbald
Hi Kern.

Thank you for the information and here are some requests for more details :)

On 25.11.2013 18:49, Kern Sibbald wrote:
2. The Bareos fork of Bacula:

Unfortunately, despite the fact that Bareos hired one of the best German Open
Source lawyers , there were a number of serious copyright violations
with their code.

I guess mixing copyright and open source into one sentence makes several people quite confused, so can you clarify what are the issues?
Is it, for instance, that Bareos wants to change license of the source code, but copyright holder does not permit it?

So as Bacula contributors and users, you would be within
your rights to feel very upset with Bareos, because they never
offered you the code they developed.

I have understood that all of their code is in Github. Isn't it so?

I assure that I will do all in my power to ensure that any
worthwhile features that Bareos implements will be implemented in
Bacula, and most likely better integrated and more robust, and where
possible with even more functionality and growth potential.

How would you do it? Would you port the features, possibly making the code better?
Or would you just code the features from scratch?

I'm sorry, but currently it seems there is some soap opera going on between these 2 projects and it is just sad to watch. I really do hope that it won't affect good ideas being spread between the 2 projects and also in the open etc.

3. Bacula Systems and the FSFE:

There are a number of points in the agreement, but probably the most
important of all is that Bacula Systems has now put in writing that it is
an Open Source company (at its heart), as it has always proclaimed, and will
contribute all the Enterprise code it creates to the Bacula Community code
base within at most a 5 year period.

So all the Bacula Enterprise features and plugins will ultimately be open sourced? Ie. we would see the delta plugin and vSphere plugin as open-source within 5 years counting from the point they were announced?

Does it also mean that these features, by worst case scenario, in the open source version will always be 5 years behind the Enterprise version?
Do you have any features in mind that you would make open sourced within the shorter time-frame?

--
Silver

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing
conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bacula Status Report

Kern Sibbald
Hello,

On 11/26/2013 11:17 AM, Silver Salonen wrote:
Hi Kern.

Thank you for the information and here are some requests for more details :)

On 25.11.2013 18:49, Kern Sibbald wrote:
2. The Bareos fork of Bacula:

Unfortunately, despite the fact that Bareos hired one of the best German Open
Source lawyers , there were a number of serious copyright violations
with their code.

I guess mixing copyright and open source into one sentence makes several people quite confused, so can you clarify what are the issues?

All code is licensed one way or another.  Virtually all Open Source code also has a copyright (the GPL is a copyright with
a license).  I would not like to burden this list with copyright/license details, so I will do so in my blog
in detail, and besides right now I am "on vacation" so please excuse me for not giving any more
details at the moment.

Is it, for instance, that Bareos wants to change license of the source code, but copyright holder does not permit it?
Most of the problems were that they incorrectly added their copyrights where they legally could
not.  I can imagine they would like to change the license, but that is speculation on my part.
What is not speculation is that they cannot change the copyright license.


So as Bacula contributors and users, you would be within
your rights to feel very upset with Bareos, because they never
offered you the code they developed.

I have understood that all of their code is in Github. Isn't it so?
You will need to ask Bareos if all their code is on Github since I don't have
access to their company.  At least the main source code is there.

I assure that I will do all in my power to ensure that any
worthwhile features that Bareos implements will be implemented in
Bacula, and most likely better integrated and more robust, and where
possible with even more functionality and growth potential.

How would you do it? Would you port the features, possibly making the code better?
Or would you just code the features from scratch?
To keep the Bacula FSFE copyright clean, we will probably need to code the
features from scratch.  However, one must realize that when coding a feature
in Bacula, if two people do the same thing, there could be a substantial overlap
of the code since one would naturally use a lot of the internal subroutines.

I'm sorry, but currently it seems there is some soap opera going on between these 2 projects and it is just sad to watch. I really do hope that it won't affect good ideas being spread between the 2 projects and also in the open etc.
What gives you the idea that there is a soap opera going on?  And what do you find sad? 
Hopefully not something that I have done.  

Certainly, if Bareos has good ideas, we will be very interested in them as
I have already stated just above.  They will clearly directly take anything from
Bacula that they consider useful.


3. Bacula Systems and the FSFE:

There are a number of points in the agreement, but probably the most
important of all is that Bacula Systems has now put in writing that it is
an Open Source company (at its heart), as it has always proclaimed, and will
contribute all the Enterprise code it creates to the Bacula Community code
base within at most a 5 year period.

So all the Bacula Enterprise features and plugins will ultimately be open sourced?
Yes.  Some such as our Oracle plugin will not be Open Sources since it uses the Oracle API which
is proprietary.  At the moment, this is the only exception I can think of though.
Ie. we would see the delta plugin and vSphere plugin as open-source within 5 years counting from the point they were announced?
The answer is yes, but with the nuance that the time period for code developed prior to the agreement
starts as of the agreement.

Does it also mean that these features, by worst case scenario, in the open source version will always be 5 years behind the Enterprise version?
Yes.
Do you have any features in mind that you would make open sourced within the shorter time-frame?
Yes we will probably make many available well before the 5 year period (I would guess even most features).
I have a number of features in mind that we are internally agreed on and others that we are
considering.  The official announcement on what they are will certainly be made at the Bacula Conference
or possibly earlier.

Best regards,
Kern


--
Silver


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Bacula Status Report

S Cooper
In reply to this post by Kern Sibbald
Hello,

my name is Maik Außendorf, I am a member of the Bareos project and co-founder of the Bareos company. I apologize for not using my original email address but that has been banned from this list withoout any given reason.

I attach my original footer below.

I just want to comment on 2 points:

1. The Free Software Foundation Europe  (FSFE) is the copyright holder
of Bacula open source. We've worked together with the FSFE to clear some
formal things in the version history and header files. I.E. some
copyright information had to be changed.

We've changed everything the way the FSFE has asked for. On August 12th
2013 the last mail from the FSFE stated, that they do not see any more
problems. Please read our FAQ article for full quotation:
https://www.bareos.org/en/faq/items/copyright_bacula_bareos.html

In that FAQ you can also find the history about the open source code fragments regarding the "bandwidth limitation" feature.

 2. GIT Our sources are all on GIT Hub since late 2012. Before that the long year Bacula community developer Marco van Wieringen has maintained his own branch mainly with patches by him and other contributors that were rejected by bacula.org. So a private thing but the only way to preserve those contributions. After the decision was made to start an own project based on that branch, it was published, is 100% AGPL and will stay so. I don't want to comment on more, because these are the important things. Everyone can reuse our code in a open source way (fully compliant with AGPL). And everyone can choose whatever open source project he or she likes best. One more thing to add: we've given a fundamental value to the Bacula community, too: the Bareos clients are compatible with Bacula daemons. And there are repositories for almost all Linux distribution ready to use + a rewritten Windows installer for the Windows client - ready to install (graphical or even unattended by command line switches). If you are missing a bacula client for your particular Linux distribution, MacOS or Windows, feel free to test our Bareos client with your Bacula director.

With kind regards.
-- Mit freundlichen Grüßen -- Maik Außendorf [hidden email] Bareos GmbH & Co. KG Phone: +49221630693-93 http://www.bareos.com Fax: +49221630693-10 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Köln | Amtsgericht Köln: HRA 29646 Komplementär: Bareos Verwaltungs-GmbH Geschäftsführer: Stephan Dühr, M. Außendorf, J. Steffens, P. Storz, M. v. Wieringen




-----Original Message-----
From: Kern Sibbald <[hidden email]>
To: bacula-users <[hidden email]>; bacula-devel <[hidden email]>; bacula-announce <[hidden email]>
Sent: Mon, Nov 25, 2013 5:57 pm
Subject: [Bacula-users] Bacula Status Report

Hello,

I would like to speak to you about the following points:

1. The rumors of the death  of Bacula (the Community version)
2. The Bareos fork of Bacula
3. Bacula Systems and the FSFE (Free Software Foundation Europe)
4. The future of Bacula (the Community version)

1. The rumors of the death of Bacula (the Community version):

I borrow words from a quote of Mark Twain: The rumors of the death
of Bacula are highly exaggerated! 

I began working on Bacula 14 years ago (in January 2000), and it has
been Open Source from the time it was publicly released in April
2002, and it will remain Open Source.  I have been and am fully
devoted to Open Source, and in particular to Bacula, which is like
my “baby”.  So to hear rumors that Bacula is dead or that I have
withheld commits because they are Enterprise features is shocking
and hurtful to me as well as not true.

I did inform the Bacula Community several years ago that my personal
participation in Bacula would decrease a bit for several years to
allow me to focus more on getting Bacula Systems started.  In my
opinion, that has not been a serious disadvantage for the Bacula
project since Bacula Systems over that period has contributed far
more code to Bacula than I could have alone over the same period,
and as you will see a bit later in this status report, Bacula
Systems contributions are absolutely guaranteed to continue in the
long run, and even increase.

2. The Bareos fork of Bacula:

The Bacula repository has been on “hold” since our last release
in early February, because on 27 February 2013, I learned that there
was a fork of Bacula made by a former “consultant” of Bacula
Systems with a former reseller of Bacula Systems.  Unfortunately,
despite the fact that Bareos hired one of the best German Open
Source lawyers , there were a number of serious copyright violations
with their code.  Since the Bacula code is copyrighted by the Free
Software Foundation Europe (FSFE), I provided the technical support,
and the FSFE worked with Bareos to clean up their copyright
violations.  That took a significant amount of time (many months),
and the Bareos code though significantly improved is still not
totally free of copyright infringements.  I won't go into the
details here as all of you may not be interested, but will have much
more to say about Bareos in later blogs, and when the blog is setup
I will let you know.

I find Bareos an unusual fork, because it wasn't done in what I
believe to be the normal Open Source way.  Normally a fork is made
when a project is blocked or has serious disagreements with the
users.  Its also normally done in open communication rather than
underhanded or in secret.  In the case of Bacula, though some of the
development slowed down (I will go into this in detail later), it
certainly was by no means stopped.  To complain about active
development in Bacula Systems, is, in my opinion, incorrect first
because adding features to the Enterprise version costs Bacula
Systems a lot mostly in salaries yet takes absolutely nothing from
Bacula.  In fact, when you read the next section, you will see that
the more that Bacula Systems develops, the more features that Bacula
over time will have.  Going back to what I find abnormal about the
Bareos fork is that they claim that they spent three years
developing a lot of new features, thus they are more feature rich
than Bacula.  Yes, for the moment, they have a few features that
Bacula does not yet have, but not for long, and more importantly
over the three years of development of those features they never
offered these new features to Bacula nor to any Open Source project.
Instead they were developed in secret.  I find that a very strange
behavior for a self-proclaimed Open Source company (actually, they
are “forced” to be Open Source because of the Bacula AGPLv3
license).  So as Bacula contributors and users, you would be within
your rights to feel very upset with Bareos, because they never
offered you the code they developed.

I assure that I will do all in my power to ensure that any
worthwhile features that Bareos implements will be implemented in
Bacula, and most likely better integrated and more robust, and where
possible with even more functionality and growth potential.


3. Bacula Systems and the FSFE:

If you have been a long time Bacula user you may recall that I
discussed the possibility in 2006-2007 of creating a company, now
called Bacula Systems, to ensure the continuation of Bacula when I
will no longer be able to personally contribute – say in 10 or 20
years, as well as to provide the financial means to add high-end
features to Bacula (a fibre channel network costs about $50K to
setup).  Much to my surprise 95% or more of the responses I got were
very positive.  Bacula Systems was created in July 2008, and for the
first two years, the Enterprise code base and the Community code
base were identical.  Unfortunately, that didn't work financially
for Bacula Systems.  Companies willing to pay, were willing to pay
for features and support but not support alone, so Bacula Systems
embarked on development to continue maintenance and improvement of
Bacula while at the same time creating mostly plugins to add
differentiation to the Enterprise version.

Now this may not sound very Open Source to you, and I understand,
because I feel the same way.  Were it at all possible, I would give
you all of Bacula Systems code, unfortunately, that is not
economically feasible at the current time, and yet without Bacula
Systems, I fear the Bacula project will die or worse yet fall into
the hands of someone incapable of maintaining the high quality we
have created.

While I was consulting with the Free Software Foundation Europe
(FSFE) on the Bareos copyright violations, Bacula Systems and I
began discussions with the FSFE on how to guarantee the long term
survival of Bacula.  These discussions, extremely positive on both
sides and all points, recently lead to a formal written agreement
between myself, Bacula Systems, and the FSFE. There are a number of
points in the agreement, but probably the most important of all is
that Bacula Systems has now put in writing that it is an Open Source
company (at its heart), as it has always proclaimed, and will
contribute all the Enterprise code it creates to the Bacula
Community code base within at most a 5 year period.  One exception
is that Bacula Systems is legally unable to contribute certain code
encumbered by third party proprietary license.  The 5 year delay
gives Bacula Systems the chance to develop Enterprise features that
differentiate it, but ensures the continual growth of the Bacula
Community code.  This model can possibly be used across the industry
to ensure the future of open source software in an environment where
development costs, particularly for hardware to do testing, are
prohibitive to the standard models of today.

5. The future of Bacula (the Community version):

If you have read section 4 above, hopefully if you were not already
convinced that Bacula is alive that you can now see that it will
have a long and successful future ahead of it.  If you have any
doubts, please do not hesitate to either send me an email on the
bacula-users list or directly to me (if you want it private).
Hopefully, by mid-December I will have a blog setup (need a major
upgrade of bacula.org to do so), and I will then fill you in on the
details of the Bareos fork as well as more details on what next to
expect in Bacula.

Thank you for contributing to and/or using Bacula ...

Best regards,
Kern
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing 
conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now. 
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Bacula-announce] Bacula Status Report

Kern Sibbald
In reply to this post by Kern Sibbald
On 11/26/2013 10:01 AM, Tim Claeyssens wrote:

Hi Mr. Sibbald,

 

Thanks for your very interesting status report.


Thanks

I  do consider myself as a Bacula user (becoming addict).

Nice.

Please allow me to try to provide me my personal reaction based on my Bacula beginner experience.

I do consider the product as being for academic minded.

Bareos ,I guess tries to point towards on less academic minded marked.

Yes, Bacula isn't the easiest program to learn, and at least in the past, we have
targeted having the same functionality as the big commercial firms, while at the
same time we did not have the human resources to build the nice web interfaces
that all the commercial products have.

I tried to rectify that a bit by implementing bat, but there are bigger more
important projects, so bat was never finished, and it lacks some fundamental
features.  This has been largely corrected with the Enterprise BWeb product,
and partially also by other programs such as Bacula Web.

I have looked but am not sure that Bareos really has something that makes
it easier to install or use.  If anyone finds that is the case, please fill me in!

 

Do know I thought of finding or making  some kind of “Bacula builder app” (like firewall builder )


What would it build?

If you are talking about initial configurations, then that we have done for the Enterprise BWeb,
and we hope to shortly have an new Bacula Web interface for the community in the next
few months, and I suspect that program might also be able to furnish some configuration
wizards such as BWeb

This could appeal less academic folks.

(Time is money and future generations could uses their minds differently J )

Do know I spend a lot of time building my infrastructure before even starting installing…

That is a smart way to go.

I do realize today that I probably should have created an NFS drive instead of big volume ,in  order to be able to do more jobs at the same time on the same drive….


I personally don't like NFS drives as they can hang any program accessing them, and it is not easy to know when
the data has actually and correctly written on the other end.  On the other hand many people forget that Bacula
has a Virtual Autochanger that work very well with disk allowing you some very significant flexibility.

My point is : Making money with support on  open source seems harsh to me though combining with something like offering (Swiss cloud) infrastructure and support seems appealing to me.

Yes, I understand that many users feel that way, but Bacula (Community) would not have most of the high end features
it has today without Bacula Systems, and Bacula Systems cannot survive without selling support.  This relationship
will bring even more high end features in the future.

Best regards,
Kern

 

 

My very best regards,

 

 

Tim Claeyssens




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users