FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Server Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-05-2008, 01:39 PM
Luke
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

Just a few thoughts*with respect to*what we spoke about at the meeting.
*
GUI for administration: There is still the webmin vs. eBox question. I honestly haven't used eBox, and it's been a while since I tampered with webmin (I don't have internet at home for my server...) but the opints made were:

--Webmin can break config files, and is more low level
--eBox is higher level, and has its own configuration files... I forget the problem with it.
*
Some have suggested taking eBox and making a fully customized Ubuntu version. I'm not into actual development now, so I don't know what kind of effort this would be. Judging by the screenshots of eBox, this could be a way to go.

*
Also, another topic on the mailing list suggests writing a terminal program that would be an all-in-one management are for server services, I believe it's tentatively called "u-s-admin". The idea is write that for CLI users, then develop a GUI frontend for it. Something else to think about.

*
Timeframe: 9.04 seems reasonable. This is almost a year to get a reasonable beta product out, whether we're making our own or modifying webmin/eBox. Intrepid is too close, as people are working on the first "point" for Hardy as well, and there are only 5 months til release.

*
One question I have: Is a web interface really the way to go? Will enterprise users go for having to have a web server to run admin services? In my personal view, it would be more reasonable to develop a program for Ubuntu that could have a GUI front made for it. An actual program is more pro than a web interface.

*
As far as the blog goes, a direction that might get more users (and actual system administrators) interested is by writing it like you're writing a magazine article. Think "Full Circle" for sysadmins. Make the dicussion high-level, talk about new software, developments on new features, post useful how-tos, and bring up recurring topics (Which VM is right for me? *soren*).

*
This would be a lot of work, I imagine. Start off small, and try to get the whole server team together on contributing in small ways, such as mailing the editor-in-chief links to discussions like those suggested above. Again, this is just an idea from me.

*
I forgot how pizza tied into this; I think Mathias was going to bring some to the next server meeting. Finally, a personal question: did the time get moved to Tuesdays at 15:00 UTC, or are we still on for Wednesdays?

*
Try to input on everything you feel you can contribute to (suggestions, help, etc.) Thanks.
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 01:46 PM
Luke
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

My opinions about web vs. program are not strong, and as always, it's open to debate. I'm no programming wizard, yet. eBox does sound quite powerful, and it would be a shame to 'reinvent the wheel'. I stand by the*opinion that a web interface doesn't feel 'right' for enterprise. Does eBox use user permissions from the OS (root, groups, etc.) or does it use its own set of users? the former would be preferable for our purposes.
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 02:07 PM
"Aaron Kincer"
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

It seems to me to ask "Will enterprise users go for xxx" is a bit too much of a generalization. I think it all depends on how good the interface is and what problems it solves. After all, there are quite a few enterprise class products that do have web interfaces for management.


In a perfect world, there would be a single web interface I could go to in order to manage all of my Ubuntu servers. In an even more perfect world, I could manage other Linux servers as well. In an absolute perfect world, I could manage virtually any OS from the interface. But one step at a time . . .


I suppose there are pros and cons whichever way is chosen. Although I really like the idea of a CLI (wouldn't that make it scriptable?) and overlay GUIs on top of that. If you have an underlying CLI that is scriptable, then you can write any number of GUIs to sit on top--web based or whatever GUI toolkit you fancy.


If I'm missing something or am off base, please set me straight.


On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Luke <lukehasnoname@gmail.com> wrote:

Just a few thoughts*with respect to*what we spoke about at the meeting.
*
GUI for administration: There is still the webmin vs. eBox question. I honestly haven't used eBox, and it's been a while since I tampered with webmin (I don't have internet at home for my server...) but the opints made were:


--Webmin can break config files, and is more low level
--eBox is higher level, and has its own configuration files... I forget the problem with it.
*
Some have suggested taking eBox and making a fully customized Ubuntu version. I'm not into actual development now, so I don't know what kind of effort this would be. Judging by the screenshots of eBox, this could be a way to go.


*
Also, another topic on the mailing list suggests writing a terminal program that would be an all-in-one management are for server services, I believe it's tentatively called "u-s-admin". The idea is write that for CLI users, then develop a GUI frontend for it. Something else to think about.


*
Timeframe: 9.04 seems reasonable. This is almost a year to get a reasonable beta product out, whether we're making our own or modifying webmin/eBox. Intrepid is too close, as people are working on the first "point" for Hardy as well, and there are only 5 months til release.


*
One question I have: Is a web interface really the way to go? Will enterprise users go for having to have a web server to run admin services? In my personal view, it would be more reasonable to develop a program for Ubuntu that could have a GUI front made for it. An actual program is more pro than a web interface.


*
As far as the blog goes, a direction that might get more users (and actual system administrators) interested is by writing it like you're writing a magazine article. Think "Full Circle" for sysadmins. Make the dicussion high-level, talk about new software, developments on new features, post useful how-tos, and bring up recurring topics (Which VM is right for me? *soren*).


*
This would be a lot of work, I imagine. Start off small, and try to get the whole server team together on contributing in small ways, such as mailing the editor-in-chief links to discussions like those suggested above. Again, this is just an idea from me.


*
I forgot how pizza tied into this; I think Mathias was going to bring some to the next server meeting. Finally, a personal question: did the time get moved to Tuesdays at 15:00 UTC, or are we still on for Wednesdays?


*
Try to input on everything you feel you can contribute to (suggestions, help, etc.) Thanks.

--

ubuntu-server mailing list

ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server

More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam


--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 02:14 PM
Neal McBurnett
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 08:39:37AM -0500, Luke wrote:
> Some have suggested taking eBox and making a fully customized Ubuntu version.
> I'm not into actual development now, so I don't know what kind of effort this
> would be. Judging by the screenshots of eBox, this could be a way to go.

Note that the eBox project itself used to be based on Debian, and is
now re-basing on top of Ubuntu, which is great.

> One question I have: Is a web interface really the way to go? Will enterprise
> users go for having to have a web server to run admin services? In my personal
> view, it would be more reasonable to develop a program for Ubuntu that could
> have a GUI front made for it. An actual program is more pro than a web
> interface.

See also https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerGUI for more on this
stuff. I'd say that an X11-based GUI on a server box would be a
security/maintenance concern to more enterprise admins than a
single-purpose, hardened web server (like what eBox needs). And note
that you don't get 5 years of support for the X stuff on LTS like you
do for server stuff.

> Try to input on everything you feel you can contribute to (suggestions, help,
> etc.) Thanks.

I don't think I've really met you before, Luke. Welcome! Can you tell us some
more about you (perhaps in a separate "Introduction" thread)?

Neal McBurnett http://mcburnett.org/neal/

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 02:29 PM
"Jim Tarvid"
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

I work from home a lot and some of my servers are beyond physical reach, so a resident management program with a GUI is one more program I will not install.

But...

A small resident server with it's own IP stack running along side the Ubuntu installation that has a chance of surviving a system crash or hack preferably in ROM would be a good thing.


Jim

On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Neal McBurnett <neal@bcn.boulder.co.us> wrote:

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 08:39:37AM -0500, Luke wrote:

> Some have suggested taking eBox and making a fully customized Ubuntu version.

> I'm not into actual development now, so I don't know what kind of effort this

> would be. Judging by the screenshots of eBox, this could be a way to go.



Note that the eBox project itself used to be based on Debian, and is

now re-basing on top of Ubuntu, which is great.



> One question I have: Is a web interface really the way to go? Will enterprise

> users go for having to have a web server to run admin services? In my personal

> view, it would be more reasonable to develop a program for Ubuntu that could

> have a GUI front made for it. An actual program is more pro than a web

> interface.



See also https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerGUI for more on this

stuff. *I'd say that an X11-based GUI on a server box would be a

security/maintenance concern to more enterprise admins than a

single-purpose, hardened web server (like what eBox needs). *And note

that you don't get 5 years of support for the X stuff on LTS like you

do for server stuff.



> Try to input on everything you feel you can contribute to (suggestions, help,

> etc.) Thanks.



I don't think I've really met you before, Luke. *Welcome! *Can you tell us some

more about you (perhaps in a separate "Introduction" thread)?



Neal McBurnett * * * * * * * * http://mcburnett.org/neal/



--

ubuntu-server mailing list

ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server

More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam



--
http://ls.net
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-05-2008, 03:14 PM
Luke
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

Steven.Miano@mybrighthouse.com:
*
*As for LTS, of course LTS is what really matters. However, I think it could be done to have a working skeleton of the program (if we write it from scratch) or even more if we use ebox/webmin by 9.04. 10.04 (Loopy Lynx) will definitely need a program such as one we are dicussing here.

*
With eBox's "bloat": Was that when you installed all modules, or just the defaults? I'm not familiar with it, but I know it is a flexible program.
*
P.S. sorry for emailing only you on accident. Gmail doesn't handle mailing lists intuitively.
*
neal@bcn.boulder.co.us:
*
As far as the X problem you mention, you have a point. However, what about piping the X functions through SSH to a remote machine if you want a GUI? You don't HAVE to install X on the server, right?


*
*


*
On 6/5/08, Miano, Steven M. <Steven.Miano@mybrighthouse.com> wrote:
Just a server admins pov:

>GUI for administration: There is still the webmin vs. eBox question.I >honestly haven't used eBox, and it's been a while since I tampered with >webmin (I don't have internet at home for my server...) but the opints made >were:

>--Webmin can break config files, and is more low level
>--eBox is higher level, and has its own configuration files... I forget the >problem with it.

Webmin:

Coming from HP-UX, I can honestly say that a GUI is much more appealing to younger system administrators. I've been administrating servers now for about eight years, and would say that a GUI can be both a hindrance and a blessing. I would hope that what ever the end result is that there is an option/switch during the install to go with a CLI environment only, or to optionally add the GUI for those that would prefer/want it.


When I initially started working with Ubuntu I was directed towards Webmin on 6.06, and 6.06.1. Webmin was a simple tar/gz file that was installed in minutes and easy to access manipulate.


Ebox:

After two years of working on Ubuntu I've given up on Webmin preferring to access my configurations through SSH and hand-jamming if it's needed. Just recently the e-box name kept on sprouting up and curiosity catching the cat had me run: sudo apt-get install ebox. I immediately aborted the install after seeing all of the 64 packages that would be required along side it.


I run linux servers so that I know what I have on the system (bloat less), having to install a slew of packages is highly dissuading to a server admin in my opinion.

>Timeframe: 9.04 seems reasonable. This is almost a year to get a reasonable >beta product out, whether we're making our own or modifying webmin/eBox. >Intrepid is too close, as people are working on the first "point" for Hardy >as well, and there are only 5 months til release.


Honestly most of the server/system administrators that I know would not update/upgrade OS's between LTS, so the push for Intrepid Ibis, or even 9.04 seems rushed, for betas, or zero points that would be great - especially for the home users, but directed toward commercial (small/medium), the LTS would really be the deal maker/breaker. In my mind if there is a slip-streamed, small footprint GUI (be it web or app based), the LTS should be the end goal.


>One question I have: Is a web interface really the way to go? Will >enterprise users go for having to have a web server to run admin services? >In my personal view, it would be more reasonable to develop a program for >Ubuntu that could have a GUI front made for it. An actual program is more >pro than a web interface.


Right now the landscape project through canonical is also a web-based gui for server admins with 5+ servers under their areas of responsibilities and should also be researched for its value as well.

>Try to input on everything you feel you can contribute to (suggestions, >help, etc.) Thanks.


I apologize if I'm pushing filler on the list, but just thought I'd throw my .02 in here for you guys. I'm sure there are many others in my situation with the same paradigm.

Cheers,

Steven

(MianoSM)

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, purge it and do not disseminate or copy it.



--
Luke L.
--
Luke L.
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-06-2008, 03:55 AM
"Brett Alton"
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Luke <lukehasnoname@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just a few thoughts with respect to what we spoke about at the meeting.

{snip}

> Some have suggested taking eBox and making a fully customized Ubuntu
> version. I'm not into actual development now, so I don't know what kind of
> effort this would be. Judging by the screenshots of eBox, this could be a
> way to go.
>
> Also, another topic on the mailing list suggests writing a terminal program
> that would be an all-in-one management are for server services, I believe
> it's tentatively called "u-s-admin". The idea is write that for CLI users,
> then develop a GUI frontend for it. Something else to think about.
>
> Timeframe: 9.04 seems reasonable. This is almost a year to get a reasonable
> beta product out, whether we're making our own or modifying webmin/eBox.
> Intrepid is too close, as people are working on the first "point" for Hardy
> as well, and there are only 5 months til release.
>
> One question I have: Is a web interface really the way to go? Will
> enterprise users go for having to have a web server to run admin services?
> In my personal view, it would be more reasonable to develop a program for
> Ubuntu that could have a GUI front made for it. An actual program is more
> pro than a web interface.

(snip)

I wasn't going to announce this anytime soon, but I'm (sort of) the
project leader for Ubuntu Home Server (now called Satega).

We're just writing out our drafting plans now and getting ready to
code in SVN in the next couple weeks.

We have very similar goals in mind (easy front-end administration for
all things server), although, we also wanted to compete with WIndows
Home Server.

I would like to say that at the school board I work at, IBM has moved
their image-processing tools from being GUI based to web based due to
lower overhead, so if you want a GUI, I suggest web, especially as it
enables the server box to stay X free.

Anyway, some files and posts on the matter regarding Satega:

logo: http://satega.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=37
mindmap (old): http://brettalton.com/satega/freemind/20080123.png
(rename .png to .mm to use with Freemind)
mindmap (new): http://brettalton.com/satega/freemind/20080529.png
(rename .png to .mm to use with Freemind)
feature list (derived from mindmap)
http://www.satega.org/wiki/index.php?title=Feature_List
Frontend/backend communication: http://satega.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=68
theme (before we had the logo):
http://brettalton.com/uhs/20080518-alpha5/ [forum post:
http://satega.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=27]
discussion for our first prototype:
http://satega.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=76

I'm sure there are all sorts of other great posts, so please look around.

Anyway, we have six guys working on this project, so I think we
shouldn't waste time and join efforts.

I own satega.org while another member is hosting it and a couple
others are mantaining Druapl, MediaWiki and phpBB3.

I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts!

PS: I do really like that underlying CLI aspect! Scripting is always fun =)

--
Brett Alton
brett.jr.alton@gmail.com

Do you really need to print this email? Help preserve our environment!

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-06-2008, 04:35 PM
"James Dinkel"
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Luke <lukehasnoname@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> With eBox's "bloat": Was that when you installed all modules, or just the
> defaults? I'm not familiar with it, but I know it is a flexible program.

I believe the "bloat" is that you have to install a full Apache stack
on the server in order to manage it with ebox, which is about as bad
as installing a full X system on a server (if it isn't needed). If
you are running a webserver, of course Apache is great, but for a file
server or a DNS server, etc, it is adding unnecessary complexity,
vulnerabilities, and resource usage. Webmin's internal webserver is
much much better in this regard.

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-06-2008, 08:06 PM
Neal McBurnett
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 11:35:06AM -0500, James Dinkel wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Luke <lukehasnoname@gmail.com> wrote:
> > With eBox's "bloat": Was that when you installed all modules, or just the
> > defaults? I'm not familiar with it, but I know it is a flexible program.
>
> I believe the "bloat" is that you have to install a full Apache stack
> on the server in order to manage it with ebox, which is about as bad
> as installing a full X system on a server (if it isn't needed). If
> you are running a webserver, of course Apache is great, but for a file
> server or a DNS server, etc, it is adding unnecessary complexity,
> vulnerabilities, and resource usage. Webmin's internal webserver is
> much much better in this regard.

I expect that some of that is the fact that, IIRC, it does user
management by installing openldap. That is presumably in line with
the expectation that what we eventually want to manage is the network,
as Dan was noting. But if you're looking for a simple /etc/passwd
file manager, you may be surprised.

Neal McBurnett http://mcburnett.org/neal/

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 06-06-2008, 08:30 PM
Dan Shearer
 
Default More discussion: GUI, blogs, and pizza

On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 02:06:33PM -0600, Neal McBurnett wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 11:35:06AM -0500, James Dinkel wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Luke <lukehasnoname@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > With eBox's "bloat": Was that when you installed all modules, or just the
> > > defaults? I'm not familiar with it, but I know it is a flexible program.
> >
> > I believe the "bloat" is that you have to install a full Apache stack
> > on the server in order to manage it with ebox, which is about as bad
> > as installing a full X system on a server (if it isn't needed). If
> > you are running a webserver, of course Apache is great, but for a file
> > server or a DNS server, etc, it is adding unnecessary complexity,
> > vulnerabilities, and resource usage. Webmin's internal webserver is
> > much much better in this regard.
>
> I expect that some of that is the fact that, IIRC, it does user
> management by installing openldap.

LDAP in itself need not be a heavyweight requirement. ldb.samba.org is a
very lightweight LDAP-type server that is the equivalent to sqlite.org,
only for LDAP.

--
Dan Shearer
dan@shearer.org

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:41 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org