What's up with the "Community Edition" on the logo?
-
@BlueKobold:
In former days, there where two camps and one was asking for hardware made by pfSense itself
and the other camp was not interested in doing that because they were though that then this project
perhaps will be going to commercial! On top of this you may think there are some developers and this
is there life to hire at a burger diner to have enough free time to serve us, please note that is not there
willing and thinking of future (only self my opinion about that). And the jump from 2.1.5 to version 2.2
was at the cost of nearly ~$90.000 as I am right informed about that cost. But we have had also a world
wide crisis and during that the most peoples must also have a look, likes you ;), on their budget and the
normally donations where falling back, so what to do now? Kicking the project? Doing some other stuff?Why not selling their own hardware and getting money for that units to support their own project?
Look, you've taken my question as a "challenge" to their view, that's not the case… I want to know what their plans are because of that change in the logo, there's a difference there, if you understood that, might had saved you a lot of time writing this essay of yours.
As for them selling their own Hardware... I'm not only in favor of that, but I also think they should implement an "official" certification program, perhaps similar to what Zabbix is doing.
@BlueKobold:
You will be only able to tweak, tune or pimp as you will knowing that hardware exactly!!!!!!
Without that knowledge you will never know on what pfSense will be installed and all that tunings and tweaks
where 100% hardware related or based, so they can only be done if they (the development team) is surely
knowing the hardware. From where they should know your next hardware basis? They can´t and if they
can´t know that they will be also not able to tune something right that is according and matching your
hardware basis. Thats it, simple, not really fine, but the true.I'll assume you're talking about how better is to test and mold pfSense around a specific hardware to get more out of it… I mean, that was exactly what I said with the "that's great!" part... I was just talking about the "names"... not the finality of it.
@BlueKobold:
Why? For sure there will be more then one way to solve that out or handle this case, but if they do
something like you are suggesting here, I am pretty sure another user would be asking today why
this was not named community version and ADI version. And on top of this the jump from 2.1.5 to
the version 2.2 and now from 2.2.x to 2.3 is coming surely with a huge amount of work for them
besides and then often something likes the name for this or that was fast given to that other edition.Yeah, I can see your point… again that's why I stated it was my personal opinion... maybe if they actually included an explanation on their blog digests about the naming, no one would need to ask.
@BlueKobold:
There are many firewall distros on the market, but turn a computer into a fully UTM unit what means
also saving much money for licenses is available for free of charge to download for any person in the
world. What should the do now on top of this in your opinion? Other projects were jumping on the
payed APPs or the payed plugin train, likes Untangle UTM, Sophos UTM and ClearOS, but not pfSense
it is still free of charge and is able to use for the private and business usage. What more we need?WE users of pfSense know that… but the market doesn't share our view. Take a look on the Spiceworks forum for example, it's plagued with paid solutions... we even had an ESF agent there, but it's been a while since I last saw her around.
Paid solutions, like Sonicwall and the like have strong marketing behind them... I proved for people time and time again that buying from the pfSense store and hiring ESF's support is miles chaper than paid solutions... it's a war really and you know... war... wat never changes.@BlueKobold:
I am pretty sure that we have the luck that all are talking about that project and I am very pleased that ESF,
Netgate and others are spending time and money for that project, for sure also to push up their companies too,
but this is in business not really bad as I see it right, it is more common. Let us imagine you will be in Brazil
and serve the entire government with pfSense boxes for a very small budget, is this not really good for you?I don't understand what you mean… are you asking if pfSense is amazing? If so... YES IT IS!
I never do "knee jerking" to any company in any project... specially for open source projects... there's a fine balance between reputation and arrogance. No Open Source project can grow without a thriving community. Some developers forget that and turn the ship back, like Zimbra... Alfresco and others did.(vYatta another example).
@BlueKobold:
Why must it be more then that? I really think that we can be proud about that project that we will be sorted
with software that is using the latest hardware very well likes, netmap-fwd, Intel QAT, AES-NI, good and fast
driver support for the newest hardware types and parts and so on and so on.Well, no one here is questioning the solution that pfSense is.
@BlueKobold:
If the developers from pfSense and their sponsors like Netgate or ESF behind all of that will be get a
benefit from all that work and they know their own hardware they are selling and for sure they will then
also be able to tune it right likes they want there will be nothing wrong with. How is saying that you are
not able to tune your hardware fine pending on their skills and capabilities? The pfSense DOC´s are free
of charge too and open to read by everyone, so we all get also chance to tune our platforms right we need
it. And if not, there will be on top of this the way to get payed support to do so. Only my 2 cents on this.I never said I can't tune pfSense to a hardware… that doesn't have anything to what I'm saying here... I clearly said I find a great thing that they are tuning their certified hardware to get better performance.
One thing I find very disturbing in your comments is the notion that seems you think ESF own the pfSense as a whole, sure they are the ones who contributed more to it's development, they own the "brand and trademark" of pfSense, but the code is a mix of a lot of effort from other people on the FreeBSD project and a significant portion of the packages everyone use in pfSense are result of community members working with ESF.
I've seen some strange decisions from them regarding the collaboration... the CLA is perfectly fine, but people like Marcelloc, JackL, Luiz Gustavo and lot others try to collaborate, but ESF tends to create more walls than bridges. The entire repository is badly documented, the source files have little comments... when someone wants to deploy a new package on the repo, they have to figure out by them selves where things are and even with the package written, ESF some times refuse altogether to deploy the package, be it by a supposed commercial interest that their customers don't have or lack of time to review the code.
It's a paradox really... they complained more than often about the majority of pull requests merged being from their own team, while they don't collaborate with the community and when the community delivers something almost done, they refuse.
I see them getting more "mature" on this aspect, but in the other hand, every turn they're calling the whole of pfSense something being owned by them... it sure is if no one else is allowed to "openly" collaborate.
That's why I found odd the "community edition" on the logo, sure someone from ESF will post here saying I'm spreading FUD and nonsense... whatever, that's not what I want. It's constructive criticism, something people have forgotten apparently.
@BlueKobold:
Some lines will be perhaps sounding strange, but it wasn´t in my intense, its more related to my poor
english language skills. Sorry for that.I tried my best to understand what you've said… if I misunderstood something, people clarify.
-
I am not impressed. I am always wary of an open-source project that re-brands part of itself a "community edition". It's been evident in my 25+ year of IT experience that whenever a project does this, it signals the start of a decline in their dedication to open source. Not at all happy to see it happen and while I love pfsense, I will now sadly be forced to waste some time keeping an eye out for alternatives just in case things go sour.
-
I am not impressed. I am always wary of an open-source project that re-brands part of itself a "community edition". It's been evident in my 25+ year of IT experience that whenever a project does this, it signals the start of a decline in their dedication to open source. Not at all happy to see it happen and while I love pfsense, I will now sadly be forced to waste some time keeping an eye out for alternatives just in case things go sour.
OMG, not more transparency! They already had multiple versions tweaked out of the box for their custom hardware, then a general CE version with decent defaults for general hardware. This helps reduce confusion. It signals nothing. They're doing more opensource contributions now than ever, and much more so than many other projects. Anyway, nothing lasts forever. Enjoy the ride while it lasts.
-
well, in 5 Years Opensense could be an alternative (to 2.3 ? ^^)
-
well, in 5 Years Opensense could be an alternative (to 2.3 ? ^^)
Because they have an OpenSource version what pfSense is also offering?
And with the pfSense version 2.4 also OpenVPN 2.4 and QAT will be perhaps in the game.I would pay for packets as a plugin system to get even the newest ones and if this might be
something around $5 or 5 € for each packet it would not be so hard for us but helps to get
very fast the latest actual packets likes FreeRadius 3.0 and so on. Why not? Some for free
and some as payed version would be not only bad as I see it right. ClearOS and Untangle
or Sophos UTM will do same and walk through the road and are fine with this. -
I am not impressed. I am always wary of an open-source project that re-brands part of itself a "community edition". It's been evident in my 25+ year of IT experience that whenever a project does this, it signals the start of a decline in their dedication to open source. Not at all happy to see it happen and while I love pfsense, I will now sadly be forced to waste some time keeping an eye out for alternatives just in case things go sour.
OMG, not more transparency! They already had multiple versions tweaked out of the box for their custom hardware, then a general CE version with decent defaults for general hardware. This helps reduce confusion. It signals nothing. They're doing more opensource contributions now than ever, and much more so than many other projects. Anyway, nothing lasts forever. Enjoy the ride while it lasts.
I was not confused before. Not sure what confusion you are referring to.
-
What's the big deal? You guys have access to an incredible security appliance for FREE! If they want to do a special version that's optimized for their hardware, to sell and make a few bucks on that great! I bet the ones complaining are the same people that are voting for Bernie.
-
I bet the ones complaining are the same people that are voting for Bernie.
???
-
What's the big deal? You guys have access to an incredible security appliance for FREE! If they want to do a special version that's optimized for their hardware, to sell and make a few bucks on that great! I bet the ones complaining are the same people that are voting for Bernie.
Who the F*** is "Bernie"?
-
Who the F*** is "Bernie"?
The only person running for U.S. President that isn't completely owned, top to bottom.
http://www.berniesanders.com/
-
@KOM:
Who the F*** is "Bernie"?
The only person running for U.S. President that isn't completely owned, top to bottom.
http://www.berniesanders.com/
Ahh thanks for that I vote for Mrs. Clinton.
-
I rest my case…
-
@KOM:
Who the F*** is "Bernie"?
The only person running for U.S. President that isn't completely owned, top to bottom.
http://www.berniesanders.com/
Seriously? Not hardly. He's just totally owned by a different group. Do you know who they are?
-
it never ceases to amaze me how, in some countries, people care about elections and more importantly, who is president/prime minister.
over here in belgium, the government = state enemy #1.
hardly anyone gives a damn what coalition is running the show; hell we hold/held the world record for NOT having an active government. in other countries there would be protests & riots; in belgium we laughed at the stupid shit the politicians were argueing about.At the end of the day, ALL politicians just fill their wallets and make things worse or at best the same …. imho doesn't really matter who's the top-dog in any modern "democratic" system.
-
Won't Get Fooled Again
(requires having been fooled)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgojY1QThe best line in this song is saved for the last line. And is appropriate every election.
Find your favorite version.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=don%27t+get+fooled+again -
This has gotten way off topic and the politics has offended some, ending this thread here.
