Github

[dwindler]

Care to explain?  Seems like things can be hid from the community now.

https://github.com/opnsense/core/commit/e061374a77f06ff10655db8a1c35a11031d44a05

[franco]

Hi there,

Not at all:

https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=3408.0

https://twitter.com/opnsense/status/757905799800877056


Cheers,
Franco

[franco]

PS: Also below.

https://github.com/opnsense/changelog/blob/308d9e9673c78a04ec07506d15827375efaee665/doc/16.7#L49

[franco]

An offensive link has been removed after another user reported it. The OP is in read-only mode and can request his account to be reactivated by sending an email to project AT opnsense DOT org


Cheers,
Franco

[franco]

We can talk about everything, and I would hope nobody appreciates setups that are used against anyone without going through the actual talks in an open setting like this forum in order to implement predefined agendas.

We wish you and your employer the best of luck with your "choice"!

[chpalmer]

Franco-  I think your showing bad taste posting the guys email address for your adoring public to abuse.  Looks like a throwaway anyways but if you want to be taken seriously you might want to be the first to grow up.

Second- your links would seem to indicate to me that your "free" version is "not so stable".  So while Im not sure of the original posters agenda now he has raised a valid question.

Private repositories make it look like your hiding something.  Just saying.

I believe the OP got what he wanted at your expense.

[franco]

TL;DR: Skip the the bold part for an answer to your question, but I do hope the long version is a lot easier to follow in order to not miss any vital information...

EDIT: You're also right, the person info has been stripped from the image.

Franco-  I think your showing bad taste posting the guys email address for your adoring public to abuse.  Looks like a throwaway anyways but if you want to be taken seriously you might want to be the first to grow up.

I'm going to respectfully disagree for multiple reasons. This is a community built on values of openness and kindness. Moderation and transparency is not always easy. When we don't aim for the community that we want it can easily be degraded by postings like this that serve no purpose but to be "jerky" and to prove a point outside of the scope of what we can actually change.

People will always ask questions, whether they post here or not, so for them this is to see how we engage in a community culture and where the line is drawn. In fact, very little moderation takes place in these forums, and some have said that they appreciate the positive vibe. This is how we started 1.5 years ago, this is still how we go on.

And lastly, this gave the basis for your posting your concerns and now they are being addressed in a properly fashion: suspending judgement and getting to the actual issue of how (and if) this commit will affect the future.

Second- your links would seem to indicate to me that your "free" version is "not so stable".  So while Im not sure of the original posters agenda now he has raised a valid question.

He raised it implicitly, but he asked a question that got answered and debunked his original position. I don't think that for us there was anything to gain here from engaging. It would have been easier to ask that question in the first place, without a link to a website that depicts our project and its contributors as "the worst people in the world".

The endgame was clear either way. Here were the options...

(a) Not posting would have shown that we don't take questions seriously.
(b) Deleting the posting would have shown that we are scared of answering.
(c) Locking the posting would have shown we are not prepared to answer.
(d) Letting the link sit there does not pertain to "free speech" as it was advertising its agenda, profoundly acting as "link bait".

And if you don't believe me, let me drop the link now with a proper disclaimer. What you are going to see is the work of a single anonymous person that has been stalking the project for over a year trying to destroy the credibility of OPNsense. That's not nice, so we don't normally have this. Here is it anyway. Please enjoy. We don't expect any sympathy. We just want others to know that this is happening and that it can hinder the growth of this community while being done for reasons that are unkind and hidden.

https://www.reddit.com/r/opnscam/

As far as "free" and "not so stable goes": OPNsense is what it is with its rapid release cycles. People come here because of it. They help this community grow at a stable rate. Others have noted that it doesn't fit their needs, that releases should be spread out more and tested longer. I believe that everybody has a point, but satisfying everyone at the same time is hard without making compromise.

In every major iteration we've changed something about the way the project works, how it communicates, how it listens to the community and a lot of great ideas for the roadmap and the release engineering itself have emerged from this. Things like the rewritten captive portal are being used around the world with very minor quirks and reports. It's scary to think that reports about the pre-16.1 captive portal not working have ceased to exist and had us wonder whether anyone was using the new one or not. Bit after bit, we were happy to learn that it simply does its job.

Also, in the beginning others have said we cannot make it past the hype and / or that we will have to prove ourselves through hard work and being better than before. I think we're doing just that at our own pace.

Private repositories make it look like your hiding something.  Just saying.

Aha, now we're getting to the juicy bits!

Let me explain. For the longest time of this project's life we have released over 75 versions on a 1-2 week basis. That's a lot. A lot can go wrong, some things were bumpier than expected though as it stands now thousands of users enjoy a rock-solid firmware upgrade mechanism, some are even running opnsense-devel and help get issues tracked down if they come across one, which isn't the norm.

The most important things for running the OPNsense project were and will always be:

1. All the repositories are freely available. No CLA, no strings attached. Contributions are welcome and are noted in the release notes to show their external origin.

2. All the code will be available under their original licenses, in most cases the 2-Clause BSD license. This helps contributors and businesses alike to take OPNsense and turn it into something even better. If we're lucky, we'll even grow stronger together.

3. The build code was fully rewritten to very easily build OPNsense yourself and everyone gets my free assistance for when they run into build problems. No hidden overrides except our signing keys that we don't publish in order to verify firmware authenticity for all binary installations.

4. Sharing knowledge and discussing issues are key.

What this means in the scope of your question is this:

The private repositories are private because some of Deciso's customers have e.g. branded versions that nobody else needs. The new addition merely elevates the flexibility of such discretion.

On top of that, the support edition will be a separate branch that will be freely available on GitHub and possible to be built using the tools that we already share. The only limitation here is that this new support addition will be a paid versions for (a) binary package upgrades and (b) company-level support.

We're not there yet and we don't know if this will pan out, but we made sure nothing is taken from the community itself. If anything, the new branch will enrich experience for the people that are capable of building the ecosystem themselves and give others asking for more enterprise-style releases a way to acquire them on terms that they expect: stability and support.

I believe the OP got what he wanted at your expense.

I believe so too. I'm firmly saying that it is not something that we need in this community.


Cheers,
Franco

[chpalmer]

Well- before I go much further there is something Im going to share with you. Something I dont pass on to anyone normally because I do not want to be labeled as "that guy".  But here goes..

Im a president of a.. well, big corporation, and I am, for lack of a better expression-  extremely hyperactive. (Get over it as I already have..) So much so that I actually take "on call" status from time to time to help out our techs so they also get some time off.  I also have a small side business that I run only to occupy my time. I drive my wife crazy. And yes- I was on Ritalin as a child.

But I could not do these "hobbies" if my people were not doing their jobs. Speaking of jobs, we have a hard time filling our "tech" positions due to certain standards we must abide by. One of them is a certain education and certain integrity. .  An education that has become more and more elusive and undesired by young people as they would rather be Pokemon Hunters and various other highly sought after positions. But also an integrity that is demanded by our customers. You may take this as bragging and rambling and really long but I have a reason..

I have had to learn to keep the train rolling as I took the engineers chair and not go off course. Its made me not trust people I don't know.. Be leary of people I do know, and to test every theory I have until the proverbial "dead horse" is ground into the soil where it was so beaten.

For that reason (and since you so happily provided "Dwight's email address) I contacted him. First thing I did (and usually do) is to ascertain his training and resume. Turns out he is only about a 1.5 hour plane ride from my office.   Further, it turns out that "Dwight" was brutally honest with you.  He was looking for a way out of his impending open source implementation and you seem to have provided his exit by nothing more than posting his "contact" form for the public to see.  You understand that this showed a disrespectful and juvenal approach?! Its also how you drew me out. Not to say that they don't have some peculiar methods as I also discussed with him but I digress. 

But it was then and only then that I was made aware of the page he linked to here. I spent only a few moments there before I began to understand the rift that exists between the two projects. I had not been proxy to this information before and thus I believe the worst thing you could do is ignore the allegations posted there but attempt to answer them in the most honest effort you can. Leave any ego at the door and answer honestly. As I have been passed over by various pfSense personnel on various reports of issues I understand that sometimes people get jilted. But as a person that sits in a big chair, I also understand decisions when they are made, will not always be understood or accepted. And I understand that the pieces of paper dropped into the "complaints" box come from all kinds of agenda's. 

Thus I understand that my credibility comes into question, as it should, every time I bring up an issue on what is supposed to be a "Security Product". If I wasn't questioned about my intentions.. Id have to question them on theirs.

I hope this makes sense and helps the entire community grow.

Good luck with your efforts.

[franco]

Hi there,

I can understand where you come from. I'll be firm, admit the mistake that I made, although now good came out of it. I'll keep telling the truth whether it's uneasy or annoying to some. I'll take all the time to explain in the world.

FWIW, I wouldn't want an employee as in this example. I've read too many books about work place culture and management guides. One of the things that stick out is that going into a discussion with your outcome can hinder productivity and cause friction between people. But productivity trumps in a larger setting as I'm sure there is a certain level of friction going on every day. It comes with the numbers, but that's just how it works.

But we're getting way off topic here.


Cheers,
Franco