Zentyal 3.5 Roadmap announced (some modules moved to Contrib)

[J. A. Calvo]

Hi all,

The roadmap for the next Zentyal Community Edition (3.5) has been published at: http://www.zentyal.org/roadmap/zentyal-3-5-roadmap/

This release will continue focusing on offering improved Microsoft Active Directory® and Microsoft® Exchange Server replacement. The main highlights are:

• New distribution base: Ubuntu 14.04 LTS
• Remove synchronization with OpenLDAP, Samba4 as main directory service
• Support for ActiveSync®
• Support for Microsoft Outlook® 2010
• Automatic Inbox refresh

Also, the following modules are going to be moved to the contrib section:

• Zarafa
• L7 Filter
• FTP

Regarding the removal of OpenLDAP synchronization, the goal of Zentyal is to offer native replacement for Microsoft Active Directory and for this end, the only real choice is Samba4. Moreover, the decision is supported by the fact that OpenLDAP and Samba4 are very complicated to maintain simultaneously and having both for directory service is causing most of the directory issues.

As to Zarafa module removal, Zentyal aims at offering a native replacement for Microsoft Exchange and the only existing technology to achieve this is OpenChange. Zentyal was willing to continue shipping both OpenChange and Zarafa so that the users could choose, but after Zarafa BV decided to discontinue partnership with Zentyal S.L., it doesn't make any sense to continue shipping this component without the support of the official development team. On the other hand, OpenChange and Zarafa are incompatible systems and Zarafa's Community Edition limits the number of Outlook users to 3 users.

Regarding the removal of the L7 Filter module, this was motivated by the fact that the l7filter package is not being maintained by upstream and does not work properly (it causes false positives that have had impact in some deployments). On the other hand, FTP module was removed because the File Sharing functionality is already covered by Samba in a much more complete way than our limited FTP implementation.

These modules will continue being supported in the existing Zentyal Server versions until their end of life. Of course, community members interesting in maintaining them will be warmly welcome.

We will shortly announce the availability of the Zentyal 3.5 Daily Builds, allowing you to test them and give feedback as soon as possible. We'll let you know when you can join the testing effort.

[StuartNaylor]

Remove synchronization with OpenLDAP, Samba4 as main directory service.

Super news about the great S4Stink debacle.

Apart from a little heartbleed the vpn package and they way it is auto configured with a currently configured Zentyal server is just really great and really handy for pushing out to clients easily.

Any of you guys been playing with SSSD and Linux AD authentication?

It would be great if something was available similar for Linux client configuration. Just a batch script that in a browser download, sudo sh and done... ?

Anyone got any Zentyal Lab spare time to give it some thought?

[estebanldu]

Lo unico que espero es que en algun momento vuelvan a implementar el modulo voip con Asterisk
Saludos

[Escorpiom]

Indeed, the decision to move away from OpenLDAP sync is a very good one.
Not so happy with Zentyal dropping more modules, but reading above explanation it seems inevitable.
Generally, I feel Zentyal is moving away from the all-in-one-box solution. That was for me the reason to jump on.
It's getting more and more difficult for me to switch to a more recent version with all the goodies removed.

Cheers. 
 

[StuartNaylor]

I totally agree as its mixed feelings.

I can totally understand the need to simplify and reduce the support complexity of Zentyal.

I have been the source of much controversy and a big pusher to drop S4sync.

The thing is I don't think you need to drop modules to reduce the complexity of Zentyal.

The main problem is the focus of the "Box" and the idea of the box is a little long in the tooth with the current market.

It shouldn't be box it should be container or VM or several boxes. Hardware is cheap, support is not.

I am a big fan of LXC because of its low resources but it could be a full hypervisor such as KVM.

If zentyal had a base network layer that supported virtualisation where a box is partitioned into containers then all these problems with complexity would vanish.

I have been playing with the Samba4 binaries because I was very aware of the loading and employment of the Zentyal design caused many problems.

Personally I think it is design and much can be done with the Base networking and Samba4.

Still we are stuck with a full Bind9 implementation and the purpose built internal DNS of Samba is left out in the cold that only provides disadvantages.

Going back to our Eric

Perfection (in design) is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. (Attributed to Antoine de Saint-Exupéry)

We already have a DNS server installed, the one we use is purely a legacy consideration as Zentyal has reused what they had.

The replication of the internal Samba4 DNS works 100%, tried tested and done on my test bed sourceforge project  http://sourceforge.net/projects/samba4all/

The only thing that I am finding is that with 4.1.6 and server side copies is that disk permission problems start to occur.

I am waiting a couple of days for the new 4.1.7 binaries and I will be pushing another rake of Virtualbox OVA's for Debian and Ubuntu (14.04) being quite important.

They are only for demonstration as they are not automated in the way Zentyal is, for production use you will have to get down to the dirty CLI.

What they do demonstrate is how light Samba4 is and how it makes User/Group and DNS replication childs play.
Samba4 makes it very easy to federate servers of specific function whilst keeping to the structure of domain security.

With virtualisation LXC or KVM I can partition complexity into containers so that simplicity is gained without any loss of function. Or simply split the functionality over a couple of low cost pieces of hardware.

The arguments with OpenLdap, S4sync, Split DNS and various others have saddened me slightly as they became very polarised into yes and no camps and it got very personal and full of individual agenda's.
What saddened me was I always thought it was very possible to support all. It still is and could be if there was some form of open discussion, but apparently that is not part of opensource.

I still feel a standard LDAP can be coupled to samba4 as a proxy and provide everything the 2.0 series had.

I believe Asterisk can be brought back online and various modules could remain and be supported.
I have said it before, that a modular product such as Zentyal is losing revenue by being forced into a monolithic support option.

There is no feedback to what is of worth to the community with a monolithic offering. Its an insurance farce where for many of us smaller more tailored systems would return more value.
The current commercial support subscriptions forces me to use Zentyal as an All-In-One which is something I will never do.
The result of this is that I am starting to use Zentyal less and less.

My servers don't have the simple common web admin console which is a real shame. I have them separated into area's of common functionality.
Gateway, Web and Email, File server is my basic three server setup nowadays. It makes the install and configuration much easier.
They are still on the same box but by being in containers they are isolated and much stronger for it.

Again I have been saddened at this polarised argument that seems to be short sighted greed that I am trying to get things for less. Whilst my argument has been the opposite and about increasing adoption and about more.

Both in infrastructure and subscriptions making things modular would only increase stability and revenue.

Maybe one day
 
     

[CNServices]

Regarding the removal of OpenLDAP synchronization, the goal of Zentyal is to offer native replacement for Microsoft Active Directory and for this end, the only real choice is Samba4. Moreover, the decision is supported by the fact that OpenLDAP and Samba4 are very complicated to maintain simultaneously and having both for directory service is causing most of the directory issues.

What will this mean, if anything, to users not wanting to share files out at the network perimeter? Will Zentyal work seamlessly with other file sharing devices and/or software on the network?

[J. A. Calvo]

What will this mean, if anything, to users not wanting to share files out at the network perimeter? Will Zentyal work seamlessly with other file sharing devices and/or software on the network?

File Sharing won't change. What we are doing is just simplify the architecture, having a single LDAP/Active Directory server (Samba4 implementation) instead of having two like we have now (OpenLDAP + Samba4) keeping them synchronized. Basically what this will mean for Zentyal users is: less issues.

[CNServices]

Basically what this will mean for Zentyal users is: less issues.

Perfect. Thank you.

[-pekr-]

Sorry for amateur question, but I don't understand the removal of FTP module. Does it mean, that we will be no longer able to upload files via FTP? E.g. for a webserver purpose?

Thanks,
Petr

[robb]

I never used FTP to transfer files. I found it a lot more convenient to use SSH/Terminal to copy/move files. And if you are busy on the server itself, you can pull in files through other ways as well.

Btw, not having an FTP module doesn't mean you can' t install FTP server software on a Zentyal server.

[StuartNaylor]

There are some web apps that rely on FTP, so dunno on that one.

I rarely use FTP but I am unsure how a SSH/terminal makes it easy.

When it comes to my web apps remotely I use webmin as the file manager makes things very easy.

http://www.webmin.com/deb.html

[J. A. Calvo]

Btw, not having an FTP module doesn't mean you can' t install FTP server software on a Zentyal server.

Exactly, and it's very well documented

https://help.ubuntu.com/14.04/serverguide/ftp-server.html

[-pekr-]

In the past I was really glad I found some fine distro with web panel, not being a Linux guru and being able to delegate some easy tasks as adding new users, to other ppl. Zentyal fitted the bill, well, almost - it still lacked in the area of aesy creation and configuration of websites / virtual domains. It did not even allowed to define custome Apache config for virtual domains. All what was needed was just one text area in user interface. My feature request was added to the list of possible future enhancements.

Coming back after one year, my impression is, that Zentyal is moving away from being a good option for ISPs, and that is imo a pity. Reading documentation suggests, my above request is still not there and removing FTP server from default distro nails it even more clearly.

I simply don't believe any second, that FTP messes with other directory services and I find the decision to remove the FTP service being really stupid. Sorry, but not willing to use any nonsense like SSH file transfers for something so basic, as is upload of webpages via FTP service. Worked well for ages.

Maybe once again a time to find a different distro, which better fits ISP needs.

[StuartNaylor]

Have a look at http://www.ispconfig.org/page/home.html. I haven't used it, but it crops up a lot and seems to get good reviews.

I think that might be the reason FTP has been removed. As it is really a different product.

[KarlMCS]

Btw, not having an FTP module doesn't mean you can' t install FTP server software on a Zentyal server.

Exactly, and it's very well documented

https://help.ubuntu.com/14.04/serverguide/ftp-server.html

I shouldn't have to get on the console to install and configure FTP.  That was the whole point of Zentyal; the box that does it all without me setting it up by hand.

They should be enhancing the FTP module instead of removing it.  The vsftpd module can't have taken a lot of resources to maintain.  This is removal of a useful feature, plain and simple.

On the other hand, FTP module was removed because the File Sharing functionality is already covered by Samba in a much more complete way than our limited FTP implementation.

I'll put this out there too, and I know not everyone will agree with me on this, but I value the choice of which protocols are readily available, even if I don't use them all simultaneously.  I do currently use FTP and not Samba on my main Zentyal server.  "We think you should use this protocol, so this other one is going bye-bye" is a very Microsoft/Apple way of thinking that doesn't befit a Linux distro.  Making an open replacement for Active Directory and Exchange is a noble goal... Just don't lose sight of your values in the process.