I’d expected this but it still sucks.

  • mindlight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Along with the termination of perpetual licensing, Broadcom has also decided to discontinue the Free ESXi Hypervisor, marking it as EOGA (End of General Availability).

    Wiktionary: Adjective perpetual (not comparable) Lasting forever, or for an indefinitely long time.

    Hello ProxMox here I come!

    • kn33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      They’re terminating in the sense that they won’t sell it anymore. They’re not breaking the licensing they’ve already sold (mostly, there was some fuckery with activating licensing they sold through third parties)

      • kalpol@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Sort of. The activation license will work as long as you have it. They won’t renew support though, which effectively kills it when the support contract runs out.

        • kn33@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          You won’t be able to upgrade to new versions when the support contract runs out, but you can install updates to the existing version as long as updates are made for it. This has always been the lifecycle for perpetual licensing. It’s good forever, but at a certain point it becomes a security risk to continue using. The difference here is they won’t sell you another perpetual license when the lifecycle is up.

    • TCB13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      44
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Hello ProxMox here I come!

      Proxmox is questionable open-source, performs poorly and will most likely end up burning the free users at some point. Get get yourself into LXC/LXD/Incus that does both containers and VMs, is way more performant and clean and is also available on Debian’s repositories.

            • moonpiedumplings@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              Nothing that is more questionable than lxd, which now requires a contributor license agreement, allowing canonical to not open source their hosted versions, despite lxd being agpl.

              Thankfully, it’s been forked as incus, and debian is encouraging users to migrate.

              But yeah. They haven’t said what makes proxmox’s license questionable.

              • TCB13@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                Thankfully, it’s been forked as incus, and debian is encouraging users to migrate.

                Yes, the people running the original LXC and LXD projects under Canonical now work on Incus under the Linux Containers initiative. Totally insulated from potential Canonical BS. :)

                The move from LXD to Incus should be transparent as it guarantees compatibility for now. But even if you install Debian 12 today and LXD from the Debian repository you’re already insulated from Canonical.

            • TCB13@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              9 months ago

              First they’re always nagging you to get a subscription. Then they make system upgrades harder for free customers. Then the gatekeep you from the enterprise repositories in true RedHat fashion and have important fixes from the pve-no-subscription repository multiple times.

              • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                As long as the source code is freely available, that’s entirely congruent with GPL, which is one of the most stringent licenses. You can lay a lot of criticism on their business practices, and I would not deploy this on my home server, but it haven’t seen any evidence that they’re infringing any licenses.

                • TCB13@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Okay if you want to strictly look at licenses per si no issues there. But the rest of what I described I believe we can agree is very questionable, takes into questionable open-source.

                  • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    I beg to differ. Building a business model around open source is tricky at best. There’s always tradeoffs, and their model means they have less support from the broader community as their project will be used less. It’s their choice to make and I don’t see anything questionable with it. It’s one of the stated goals of GPL to not impede business with open source.

                    Proxmox isn’t making you sign away rights granted by the license - that to me is questionable legally and downright bullshit morally. Again, what they’re doing is fine, even if it makes their product undesirable to me.

                    Thank you for putting the word out on Incus as an alternative to Proxmox, one that is likely to fit the needs of many that are ill served by Proxmox. But besmirching their reputation on moral grounds doesn’t do anyone any favors. It ends up soiling the reputation of Incus as a side effect, even.

                  • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    “How dare this business try to make money?!!”

                    Open source still has to exist within the framework of capitalism. I am all for building the fully automated luxury gay space communist utopia where people just build awesome software and release it for free all the time without ever having to worry about paying the bills (seriously, I would encourage every open-source advocate to think about how much more awesome stuff we would have if universal basic income was a thing), but that is simply not the world we’re in right now. They need to keep the lights on, and that means advertising their paid services.