Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    /home/India/Kolkata
    Posts
    306

    Question Suggestion Regarding HyperVM/Kloxo/LxLabs Future

    This is a copy of what I just posted at LxLabs Forum HERE. Not all may be a registered forum member there; so let's see what friends at WHT has to say regarding my suggestion:

    Now that we know that HyperVM/Kloxo won't be continued officially by Lxlabs, we the users of their products should think of something to let these wonderful softwares continue in some way.

    It is being suggested by many that it should go Opensource, but the burning question is: "DOES ANYONE HAVE ACCESS TO THE SOURCE CODE YET?"

    If we go optimistic and presume the source is still accessible by someone at LxLabs (Bhargava?), the possibility to go opensource strengthens. But there are obviously some shortfalls as to going opensource:

    - No guarantee of professional maintenance of the code
    - May be too less development or updates
    - Rely on the whims of the developers who are not paid
    - Providers and users in general not convinced to use solutions if gone opensource (lack of faith after the exploits or whatever)
    - Too many forks of the project releasing using OS code and bloating the market and our choices.
    - Can't risk our systems when root servers are involved; code going public can result in hackers having full view of the code and making even more exploits. All damage would have been done by then and we still wait for developers promising for fixes for days and weeks.
    - Can't do business professionally with fully OS code and associated risks.

    Alternative suggestion

    Why not form a non-profit body to professionally maintain the code?
    Let us form VSPA (VPS Service Providers Alliance) which would recruit paid developers and continue the software. This way a paid solution will exist and ownership will be retained by a non-profit organization and the products will continue better.

    - VSPA takes all payments, recruits developers and pay for running expenses eg-servers.
    - VSPA could essentially have 5 board members (one could be Bhargava) who are among the top VPS providers and lack of HyperVM would hit their margins and business hard. They may draw salary too.
    - LxLabs clients who are atleast 3months old (client.lxlabs.com account creation date) should automatically become members of the alliance.
    - Alliance members get discounted loyalty pricing say $0.40/VM
    - New users will pay the existing rate or higher say $0.75/VM
    - VSPA concept and paid development will infuse trust and well-feeling about the products and will help the industry as well as end-users.

    Something to think about...isn't it?

    Myself a fellow Indian from Kolkata (founder of AdvancedVPS.com) and satisfied user of lxlabs.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    2,416
    I could not disagree more with your list of negative points regarding open sourcing HyperVM.

    Quote Originally Posted by agnivo007 View Post
    - No guarantee of professional maintenance of the code
    - May be too less development or updates
    - Rely on the whims of the developers who are not paid
    - Providers and users in general not convinced to use solutions if gone opensource (lack of faith after the exploits or whatever)
    - Too many forks of the project releasing using OS code and bloating the market and our choices.
    - Can't risk our systems when root servers are involved; code going public can result in hackers having full view of the code and making even more exploits. All damage would have been done by then and we still wait for developers promising for fixes for days and weeks.
    - Can't do business professionally with fully OS code and associated risks.
    With respect to the first three bullet points, the product was at the whim of a single developer and you are seeing now the risk associated with that dependency.

    Having the code exposed to the community that *depends* upon it can only bring out *more* talent, not less, for the motivation to move the project forward should be very high indeed.

    Providers and users: they will be convinced to use a product if it offers value amid safety. Currently it doesn't offer safety. An open source HyperVM certainly can be developed to meet user's safety requirements, just as a closed source product was developed which utterly failed to meet provider and user security/safety requirements.

    Too many forks: Forks are not in and of themselves a problem. Often forks form due to frustration within a segment of a community. What can't be known is how this will all play out. In the closed source model users don't fork, they leave and buy someone else's product. What a solid open source project requires is leadership. If the HyperVM user community can show leadership to bring about a *closed source* consortium, then this leadership drive could redirected as leadership under an open source model. Are the models the same? No. But the web hosting community that relied upon HyperVM is large and diverse - it seems likely there are able people out there to take on the various roles required to make an open source project a success.

    Remember: they (HyperVM/etc users) are all very highly motivated.

    Cant risk our systems / hackers having full view of the code: Privately developed code is not necessarily more, or less, secure. Nor is open source code necessarily more or less secure, or designed better or worse. You'd think this would be understood by now. If all the problems are out in the open, developers/users are highly motivated to fix them, provided the project has drive and focus.

    Can't do business professionally with fully OS code and associated risks:

    This last statement is what prompted me to reply in the first place as it is so demonstrably false as to be absurd. Many web hosts use open source products extensively to run their business and to provide services fro sale to clients. Somehow they manage to do that despite every line of CentOS code, which many HyperVM users employ, being available for any hacker to read. Ditto for BSD's, Open Solaris, Apache, PHP, Python, sshd, bind, Perl, php-some-user-tool-ad-nauseum etc. The hosting service industry - multi-billion dollar business - is very reliant on open source tools and technologies and even standards.

    Somehow I'm sure that a few bright minds can come up with a transition plan that moves HyperVM to an open source model with a minimum of issues.
    Last edited by mwatkins; 06-15-2009 at 05:11 AM.
    “Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under
    considerable economic stress at this period in history.”

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    177
    The problem I can see occuring is LxLabs will be gone, who will head this OS Project? Or will we (as mentionned before) end up with 25 diffrent versions floating about (maybe not a bad thing, encourage competetion between the diffrent camps).

    As for handing it over too this VPSSPA (google shows nothing on page one for them, and Ive never heard of them), I doubt that would have been the coders choice.
    Darren Tod
    RPD Hosting

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,521
    Other than if someone has the source code or not, the second biggest problem is WHO shall be maintaining the software...
    LIMENEX WEB HOSTING
    Affordable High Performance Web Hosting in United States & United Kingdom
    Web Hosting | Reseller Hosting | Managed VPS | Managed Dedicated Servers | Cheap SSL Certificates

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    2,416
    Regardless of what open source licensing scheme is adopted, there certainly could be multiple versions created. Some may choose to take the code internally and develop solutions for their own business.

    Others may be more interested in or unable to do anything but support communal development.

    The OP cited forks as a problem. To this I can only retort: Who cares?

    I see differentiation as a positive development for any product class, but particularly for this type of solution that drives commodity VPS services, some differentiation between hosting providers isn't necessarily bad. In a market sector where "me-too" services were becoming something of an epidemic, differentiation will bring new competition and that is a good thing in my book.

    Sure, some providers will feel threatened by that. Larger providers may have resources to do specific customizations while smaller providers can only rely on the communal development fork. Providers with in-house development talent or the capability to manage development projects properly will have an edge over those who do not. Again, who cares? It may be the community edition has more momentum in the end due to greater numbers of contributors (not all need be developers of course) and users (including testers).

    Sure, the road ahead will be, initially at least, a little more bumpy and twisted, but in the end it will all work out because so many are motivated to make that happen.
    “Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under
    considerable economic stress at this period in history.”

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    OZ
    Posts
    55
    Hey Guys,
    The whole negative pitch about the danger of letting the Lxlabs source go open is so ludicrous, the only thing near to it is the Microsoft shills warning the world about how unsafe OS code is!!!
    (Hmmnn, maybe they ARE) :-)

    Peace!
    In a world already running on open source.....
    -----------------------------------
    CENSORSHIP?? They can't stop m

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,175
    There is nothing wrong with open source. There may be some vulnerabilities at first, but will quickly be patched up with all the people wanting to fix HyperVM and Kloxo.
    www.DMEHosting.com - DME Hosting LLC | Servers, KVM/OpenVZ VPS's, Email Hosting, Web Hosting

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •