From: Kern S. <ke...@si...> - 2007-07-16 16:40:47
|
Hello, Sorry this is a bit long ... 2.2.0 release should be soon: I have just made the last source code changes to version 2.1.27 that I am planning before the 2.2.0 release. Barring any new reported bugs, what is now in the SVN will be what is released, with the exception of a bit of work on the Release notes, and a review of the manual to ensure that we have documented all the new stuff. IMO, the code is very stable and ready for production use (the latest SVN changes are not yet tested, but *should* have little or no impact). The 2.2.0 release should occur any time from a week to a month from now. The exact date depends on how it "feels" and whether or not someone tests Win32. I am considering not releasing the Win32 binaries with 2.20 since IMO they have not been sufficiently tested. The old Win32 FD is compatible with 2.2.0. All that will be determined in the next week or two -- who knows, I may find enough energy to test Win32 myself. I remind you that the major objectives of this release were (at least from my own efforts) to improve performance, and to add a nice graphical user interface. Those two objectives with a lot of help from Eric and Dirk have been attained. The following items from the Projects List have been completed for 2.2.0: Items Completed: Item: 2 Implement a Bacula GUI/management tool. Item: 18 Quick release of FD-SD connection after backup. Item: 23 Implement from-client and to-client on restore command line. Item: 25 Implement huge exclude list support using dlist Item: 41 Enable to relocate files and directories when restoring Item: 42 Batch attribute inserts (ten times faster) Item: 43 More concurrency in SD using micro-locking Item: 44 Performance enhancements (POSIX/Win32 OS file access hints). Item: 40 Include JobID in spool file name After version 2.2.0: I plan to concentrate my personal efforts roughly 50/50 on two projects: 1. Implementing the framework to permit implementation of Projects List items 1 (Accurate restoration of renamed/deleted file) and 6 (Implement Base jobs -- also called de-duplication). 2. Setting up professional support services for Bacula (i.e. a company). I don't think the first item needs much explanation other than to say that once the framework is implemented, adding the specific features will be minor subprojects. The second item is something I have been discussing from time to time for about a year now. The background on that is that in the beginning Bacula was used by a small group of more or less independent sysadmins. I had a lot of pleasure working with them, helping them get Bacula installed, and implementing features they wanted. Now however, Bacula is being used more and more by enterprises (here I use this in a broad sense meaning: governments, universities, and corporations) which have some rather specific needs that are currently largely unfulfilled by the market place and by the Bacula Open Source project: 1. Enterprise needs require more high end features in Bacula 2. Enterprises are not willing (or cannot) make donations or pay for developement to an Open Source project (there are a very small numer of exceptions to this -- and thanks to those who are exceptions). 3. Enterprises can and do pay *very* hefty maintence fees sometimes for support of Open Source software, and some are willing to pay for certain development providing it is with a "company". 4. Many enterprises cannot or are reluctant to use Open Source software unless they have professional support contracts. 5. Other enterprises cannot or are reluctant to use Open Source software unless they have professional support contracts with the software supplier. 6. It is hard to find Open Source developers for a project like Bacula, but it is easy to hire them. 7. Bacula has now become a big project (especially with version 2.2.0) So after a lot of thought, as I have previously discussed, at least in part, on these lists, I have come up with the idea of creating a company to ensure that there is professional support for Bacula. To the best of my knowledge there is no parallel to the proposed company in the Open Software world. The nearest examples are Red Hat and MySQL, yet this company will be different. One unique aspect is that rather than retaining full control over the Bacula source code and putting it into this company, I have transferred its administration to the FSFE. I expect to see the Bacula project continue much as it is working hand in hand with the new company. The company service offering is planned to be: 1. Bacula Software Installation and Support Services with emphasis on providing level 3 support services to independent level 2 Bacula support providers. Only in the case where no level 2 (or special cases) do we expect to supply level 2 services. For those of you who are not familar with support levels: - Level 1 => in house support personnel - Level 2 => a company that supplies general support to level 1 support personnel of their clients. - Level 3 => support provided to professional support level 2 companies directly from the product developers. 2. Education and Certification Services These education and certification services are designed for: 1. Companies who wish to certify their own support or learn how to do it. 2. Individual consulatants. 3. Third party support providers 3. Consulting Services This should provide a means for companies to request and pay for development of specific features. The bottom line is that after a lot of discussions, I think this company can provide a nice interface between the Bacula project and independent Bacula service providers. Though I haven't gone into all the details, I don't see any conflict of interest with this project and the Bacula project -- in fact, IMO, it is probably the fastest way to have a way to employ people to add features to Bacula, no is there a conflict with large or small companies that supply consulting or support services. There is a small amount of overlap, but in general, we have found that existing support service organizations need some sort of contractual relationship with the Bacula project in order to satisfy their corporate customers, and that is the role we wish to fill. If all goes well, the company will be formed in the next few months, and will be in operation by the end of the year. At the moment, aside from myself, there are three other founders located in Switzerland, France, and Germany, and we are still looking for two or three more. Our current number of 4 is what we all consider the bare minimum to make the company work. We believe that it can be self-funding (each founder putting in a part of the capital and their manpower) and that at the end of the first year it will be profitable. If the concept works here in Europe, we will expand to the US within a year or two. The formation of such a company means a number of changes: 1. The development of Bacula will slow down for a period of about 6-9 months during the formation and initial running of the company, then should gradually get back to the current speed and over time if the company is successful, there should be a significant increase in the "contributions" to Bacula development. 2. Bacula project development will concentrate a bit more on Enterprise needs. 3. The Bacula project will remain largely unchanged. 4. In the near future the Bacula project will no longer be providing binaries. They will be available for free to individuals, contributors, and charitable organizations through the professional web site. 5. Professional support contracts will be possible (mostly through existing third party support organizations) or directly with the new company. 6. Bacula professional services will have a certification procedure, which will guarantee a minimum compentency level (provided you work with certified engineers or support services). 7. Enterprises will be able to contracturally fund specific development if desired. We have a *strong* preference that all development be integrated into the Open Source code base. I.e. we are not interested in proprietary development. At this point, we have a general corporate overview that will be posted on the corporate website once the corporation is created. We also have a proposed fee structure. We believe that we have defined a win-win situation that will benefit everyone currently working with Bacula including hardware manufacturers and future Bacula users. The losers (if there must be such) will be the large commercial backup software companies that are currently overcharging for their license fees. That is it in a nutshell. As part of this initiative, I have been visiting a few Bacula users. If you are a large professional service provider or a bank or big name company, or otherwise a big Bacula user and you are located in Europe, I would possibly like to visit your company for a day to explain this concept and more importantly to learn what you find missing in Bacula (the program or the services). If this interests you, please contact me directly off-list. As mentioned, we are still looking for a few additional "founders" that have Bacula experience (sysadmin, installation, running a Bacula installation, or programming) and over the next two years would like to work for a company such as what I have mentioned above. If that is your case, and you live in continental Europe, please contact me directly off-list. Best regards, Kern |