I had a related question. In enterprise subscription, do you have to define a hypervisor license per node during the purchase? In my current setup we are using both LXD and KVM on the same node which is a bit hacky but works, does it change in 5.12? What about other hypervisors like Firecracker?
We will contact you by email to know more about your particular needs and provide you with more information.
in case you guys didn’t spot it, this is where you definitely made the wrong turn.
Dear Alberto & all…
there’s a lot of “open core” products I used, both commercially supported in the $$$$$$ range and without support.
not a single project had ever made the choice to limit upgrades/migrations. (and the others don’t have such fragile database “schema” and working backup/restore mechanisms). I’ll probably not be affected much, but I’m also affected by if there’s more or less users, more or less industry footprint etc… But really, in very simple terms: this is a bad decision, especially since you’re somehow not able to just offer a ‘cheap’ d/l subscription like other projects do.
the offering feels unrefined to me, it needs to make people want to have it, not to force them.
please find a solution that ensures you stay recognized as a usable OSS project i.e. in France - such recommendation lists are effective (in OSS and commercial terms) beyond dreams.
please don’t forget you can ask your community for advice before making product decisions that “strengthen the community” aka wipe you off a whole national gov market instead.
Unbelievable! My deployment is totally non-commercial, but I won’t beg for migrators licensed under some proprietary license. This contradicts with my understanding of free software. You really shouldn’t build your business model around the obstruction of upgrade paths.
Some time ago, I found a problem with the fsck tool and fixed it. If I had access to the proprietary migrators and found a bug in them, would I be then not allowed to post my fix here on the forums because of this license crap? Rhethoric question, of course…
I think as well that you took the wrong route. It should always be possible to upgrade to another version.
We do use Open Nebula commercially. But we have less than 50 VMs running on it and at the moment we don’t make money with this infrastructure. We wanted to have it first running for a year or two to see if it fits our needs and then we would scale up. And I am not willing to pay a lot of money in this first year to see if it fits our needs. (I already invest many hours.)
If you would have an offer where I only need to pay 100 or 200 dollars for a small scale infrastructure then it would be something different. But right now you created a mess that doesn’t make the community stronger.
Thanks for your feedback, Florian. We’ve taken this decision precisely to avoid an “open core” model, and given that migrators will be available for non-commercial deployments, we think that this minimizes quite a lot the impact of these changes on regular users, while ensuring that corporate users that actively support OpenNebula get the benefits that they deserve for their contribution to the sustainability of the project.
As for the French SILL ( Socle Interministériel de Logiciels Libres), it is our understanding that, given that OpenNebula CE is released under Apache License 2.0, there is no fundamental conflict with their policy of inclusion on the list: https://disic.github.io/sill/index.html#orge3a69d7
Hi Wilma. Sorry if these changes go against your personal understanding of free software. Again, given that OpenNebula CE is released under Apache License 2.0, it is our understanding that those corporate users with commercial deployments that don’t support the project (i.e via OpenNebula Subscription or with some significant contribution to the OpenNebula Community), will always have their four essential freedoms intact.
Our commitment to the universal principles of Free Software implies that (among other things) anyone can keep using an specific version of OpenNebula for as long as they want, or undertake the development or maintenance actions they decide on their version of OpenNebula, with no restrictions at all (apart from those imposed by the Apache License 2.0 itself).
Hi Raffael. In your case, as you are running a PoC, I’d strongly recommend that you contact us through https://opennebula.io/get-migration/ so that my colleagues can look into your circumstances and provide you with some specific advice.
So if I’m understanding correctly there is no more CE migrator.
You can’t go from 5.10 to 5.12?
The only way is to explain what you do with Open Nebula to get access(if non commercial)?
If that’s true then this is really sad.
What you are doing here is a cheap lawyers’ trick. You remove an essential piece of a free software, put it under restrictions and keep repeating: “But the rest of it remains free”. Technically, you’re right. Morally, it is more than questionable.
Furthermore, you’re breaking a promise here. You promoted this software once with “long term stability and performance through a single integrated patching and updating process” (Source).
Who knows, next month you might remove all KVM support or Sunstone and make it only accessible under your proprietary license. And still you can claim, the rest of OpenNebula was still free software. And the corresponding blog post’s title would be “Strengthening the community even more”. Do we have any guarantees that this will not happen?
Hi @branislav_k. If you are interested in the 5.10 > 5.12 migrators, just fill in this form confirming yours is a non-commercial deployment, and that’s pretty much all you need to do: https://opennebula.io/get-migration/
Hi @wilma_hermann. What you are describing is an “open core” approach, which is precisely the model we’re trying to avoid.
As I said before, OpenNebula CE is a full-featured version of OpenNebula, released under Apache License 2.0. Access to migrators for commercial deployments (which is something that is not required to run the software, or to exercise the rest of rights granted by the Apache License) will only be available for those corporate users that contribute to the project in an active way.
It is our understanding that the long-term sustainability of open source as a whole requires corporate users to seriously consider this as part of their social responsibility. If yours is a non-commercial deployment, please submit the aforementioned form to get access to the CE migrators.
Try harder, it has not worked so far!
No, it’s not! OpenNebula 5.10.x contained the feature to upgrade an installation of a previous version. OpenNebula CE 5.12.0 lacks this feature. How can something be full-featured if a feature is missing?
It is required to run the software against an existing database! If my database contains entries from a previous version, OpenNebula CE 5.12.0 refuses to start. If access to the migrators is not a requirement, then - obviously - wiping my database is a requirement to run the software. Is that what you’re trying to tell me?
I think OpenNebula will leave the Opensource mind & culture.
Anyway …i tried now to upgrade from version 5.10 (i think this is the EE !) to 5.12.0 (i think is the CE!).
Doing so … changing the REPO from 5.10 to 5.12.0 -> no success - i cannot update the onedb.
So how is the upgrade Procedure to upgrade from 5.10 (EE) to 5.12.0 (CE) ?
That’s the whole problem @Githopp192, you can not upgrade without subscription. Unless you are running a non commercial OpenNebula cluster, then you can ask for the upgrade scripts AKA migrators.
AFACT there is no difference between the EE and CE, it’s just what you get the migrators with a subsrcription which makes it EE.
As @roedie already said. You need to ask them for the migrator scripts. So basically it boils down to the situation that either all start lying to them and tell them that they have a non commercial cluster. Or that someone is doing it and then releases the migrators somewhere else on the internet. Because without them the CE version is pretty useless.
Thanks @roedi & @Raffael for your contribution.
At least there is a difference between EE and CE, when you are changing the REPO from -->
you will get this output: (see the “CE” context below ! --> 5.12.0-1.ce.el8)
Package Architecture Version Repository Size
opennebula x86_64 5.12.0-1.ce.el8 opennebula 167 k
opennebula-common noarch 5.12.0-1.ce.el8 opennebula 23 k
opennebula-flow noarch 5.12.0-1.ce.el8 opennebula 45 k
opennebula-gate noarch 5.12.0-1.ce.el8 opennebula 16 k
opennebula-ruby noarch 5.12.0-1.ce.el8 opennebula 108 k
opennebula-rubygems x86_64 5.12.0-1.ce.el8 opennebula 13 M
So, when Alberto is stating that " OpenNebula CE is a full-featured version of OpenNebula , released under Apache License 2.0.", i should be able to do an Upgrade to the 5.12.0 CE Edition.
When this would be not possible anymore, then an OpenSource community edition makes no sense, because a community editon, which you cannot update under the “CE Apache License 2.0” is useless.
When true, this fact (or not) may be in a conflict with the new Upgrade Policy statement from OpenNebula:
In major and minor releases, both editions share the same numbering—so, for example, OpenNebula 5.12 is distributed in both editions. However, maintenance releases follow a different versioning:
- Enterprise maintenance releases are denoted by major . minor . maintenance (i.e. 5.12.1)
- Community maintenance releases are denoted by major . minor .0. maintenance (i.e. 220.127.116.11)
For each new major or minor release, OpenNebula Systems contributes to the Community Edition all bug fixes and software patches with minor enhancements that have been developed and incorporated into an Enterprise Edition version during the previous maintenance cycle.
The final statement from OpenNebula makes it clearer - so CE will lose the Upgrade Support, when not
declaring/confirming --> "non-commercial deployments or significant contributions "
Needless to say, we are not leaving the Community Edition of OpenNebula behind. This edition will continue to be a full-featured version of OpenNebula. Community users won’t notice any difference apart from the upgrade support, as migration packages will no longer be shipped with the community packages. However, migration packages will be available for users with non-commercial deployments or significant contributions to the OpenNebula Community. So for most of our community users there will be no real impact, given that the changes to the use and distribution license of the migrators won’t apply to them.
I personally do not think, ONE is anywhere near to be classified as ‘Enterprise’ by any means, referring to your subscription titles that is.
Secondly, you blocked updates due to this, when most likely this is community contributed code and commercializing it?
Why are pricing for Enterprise hidden away and not publicly listed?
If the rumours are right, at such high price tags, you are not VMWARE or anything near that IMHO.
The adoption is not even there, and not one person has shown interest in creating a course on ONE… so you have a long way to go still…
Strategically, I think you have taken the wrong approach, like many companies have done and what we have seen is forks of the projects.
Create adoption 1st, consider putting a price tag on subscriptions, but low to show its needed for sustaining the company (for which we understand) that can be achieved with growth i.e volume X subscriptions. What you have done, you count your few clients and trying to sustain the business by putting a high price tag on subscriptions.
IMHO, focus on adoption for growth with a low subscription. How to create adoption, with content, WHAT can you do and HOW in detail that is non-existent to ONE. You have made this mistake once with your training behind your own walls and now you wonder what else we need to do survive?
I can spell it out if needed, but the answer is right there for your survival.
While I think the decission to remove the migrators is… uhm… not that good of a decission, I also think the pricing isn’t too bad. But, I’m also not aware of the current VMWare princing, so I might be wrong here.
Thank you all for your questions, comments and suggestions. Let me clarify some aspects of the new policy we put in place earlier this month:
As already mentioned in the original announcement, it is our understanding that the original concept of open source has to be adapted to the current circumstances because it is profoundly unfair for the community when large corporations adopt a successful open source project without contributing to make the project sustainable in the long term.
We are not adopting an “open core” model here, because what OpenNebula Enterprise Edition brings along is basically a more tested, hardened, and production-ready version of OpenNebula that incorporates additional bug fixes developed by OpenNebula Systems and software patches with minor enhancements. OpenNebula CE is a full-featured version, and comes with the same functional components and product features, but follows a separate maintenance cycle (with the CE one based on community contributions). For more details, please read our Release Policy.
The OpenNebula Community Edition is released under Apache License 2.0, and our commitment to the Open Source Definition remains intact. Users of OpenNebula CE retain all the rights that this license has always provided, including the option to use a specific version of the product for as long as they want. Just a reminder: open source licenses protect both users’ and developers’ rights and freedoms.
Corporate users with an active OpenNebula Subscription will have access to the EE migrator packages, among other benefits that we think they deserve due to their commitment to the project. For more details, and access to an online pricing calculator (which has always been public, btw), visit https://opennebula.io/get-upgrade/. As you can see, our pricing model is simple and clear, and it’s based on two key components: the type of front-end deployment, and the type and number of managed nodes. It is described in our web page and in our Subscription Guide. As it happens, in a few days we’ll be publishing a new series of datasheets showing the savings that OpenNebula provides in comparison with VMware and OpenStack vendors…
Regarding the upgrade process for the OpenNebula CE, we have indeed announced that migration packages will be available for users with non-commercial deployments or significant contributions to the OpenNebula Community. Translation: companies that make money with OpenNebula, and therefore benefit directly from the work we do as an open source project, are from now on expected to give something back, either via OpenNebula Subscription or with some significant contribution to the code. This sounds just fair to us, although we understand that it puts some pressure on companies that until now assumed Free Software was free (as in free beer), and didn’t see any benefit in engaging with the OpenNebula community.
Regular users can always get access to the CE migrators via https://opennebula.io/get-migration/ We provide these in good faith, so companies or individuals that, instead of trying to find a way to contribute to the project and its community, decide instead to use or distribute the migrator packages in violation of the OpenNebula Software License Agreement for Non-Commercial Use must know that they would be liable to legal action.
To wrap up: as we announced earlier this year in our traditional Year in Review blog post, the OpenNebula project is in the middle of an exciting turning point. We are incorporating amazing new features to the product, and consolidating its positioning as a powerful enterprise-ready platform for private, hybrid and edge clouds. Through the EU-funded OneEdge project, we are creating a pioneering open source Edge Computing platform, which is playing a key role in our approach towards serverless computing based on a unified orchestration of VMs, system containers and application containers.
The policy change we adopted in early June is intended to deliver more value to regular users and to the increasing number of corporate users and companies that decide to establish an active commitment to the project and engage with its community. Companies with a Corporate Social Responsibility approach towards open source, and in particular towards the OpenNebula project, are the ones that we believe really deserve to benefit from our work. As simple as that.
PS - Users with non-commercial deployments or with significant contributions to the OpenNebula community, please get your CE migrator packages by submitting this simple online form: https://opennebula.io/get-migration/
----- This post violates our blog’s netiquette policy and has therefore been deleted. If you are the original author, please refer to our Community Guidelines -----
I have to admit I didn’t see this coming. Some of the major advantages that was sold from ONE was it’s ease of adoption and deployment and the “single” release for both community and enterprise. I bought this wholesale. This was the reason for my adoption.
IMHO I think you would have been better off using two different versions; one freely available upstream version with all tools and packages available and another stable downstream enterprise version similar to RedHat model. This is a proven model and helps with community adoption.
I have been running ONE at home for about 4+ years and now I’m concerned I may be stuck on version 5.10.
I have put in an official request for access. I’m anxiously awaiting your response.
Thanks for your comments @Haydn_Solomon. We’ve tried to keep the basic principle of the “single distribution” by synchronizing EE and CE at the end of each maintenance cycle: https://github.com/OpenNebula/one/wiki/Release-Policy
As for the CE migration packages, for users with non-commercial deployments (including those for personal use), getting the migrators through the online form (https://opennebula.io/get-migration/) should be almost automatic.