Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
In case anyone is interested there's a set of release notes and GA for Zimbra 10 on the following page: https://wiki.zimbra.com/index.php?title ... ldid=69494
There's also builds available from ianw1974, link is on this page: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=68097&p=308496#p308496
There's also builds available from ianw1974, link is on this page: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=68097&p=308496#p308496
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
Interesting.
At first glance it *looks* like Zimbra have written alternatives to all the ng modules and that complicates the upgrade process. There does not appear to be any supported method for upgrading a single server installation yet if using the ng modules.
For unfounded speculation, I wonder if this represents a fracture in the relationship between ZeXtras and Zimbra and was the catalyst for ZeXtras forking Zimbra and striking out on their own?
Edit: The repositories for Ubuntu are :
aws s3 sync s3://repo.zimbra.com/apt/1000
aws s3 sync s3://repo.zimbra.com/apt/1000-ne
At first glance it *looks* like Zimbra have written alternatives to all the ng modules and that complicates the upgrade process. There does not appear to be any supported method for upgrading a single server installation yet if using the ng modules.
For unfounded speculation, I wonder if this represents a fracture in the relationship between ZeXtras and Zimbra and was the catalyst for ZeXtras forking Zimbra and striking out on their own?
Edit: The repositories for Ubuntu are :
aws s3 sync s3://repo.zimbra.com/apt/1000
aws s3 sync s3://repo.zimbra.com/apt/1000-ne
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
The release-notes says that no migration is currently possible, but tools will be available "later".
From the way these tools are currently "integrated" (or not), I'd say they were implemented as a stop-gap, short-term solution anyway. A solution that has now run its course, apparently.
I would really like this to be available on AlmaLinux9, TBH, before I upgrade.
I need to sun-set CentOS 7 and I'd rather do that for something RHEL9-based than RHEL8. These migrations are a PITA and the less often I've got to do them, the better.
From the way these tools are currently "integrated" (or not), I'd say they were implemented as a stop-gap, short-term solution anyway. A solution that has now run its course, apparently.
I would really like this to be available on AlmaLinux9, TBH, before I upgrade.
I need to sun-set CentOS 7 and I'd rather do that for something RHEL9-based than RHEL8. These migrations are a PITA and the less often I've got to do them, the better.
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
The Zextras tools (or the -ng extensions) enabled the commonly promoted "side by side" migration. I've spent a few hours having a look at v10 today and it appears it's back to the old clunky zimbra backup, which is not real time and only good for DR if you make frequent local copies of the redo logs. So that's a significant regression on the -ng backup along with making migrations more difficult.
Other than that it appears mostly much of a muchness and it'll be interesting to watch how it evolves. Hopefully competition from Zextras has lit a bit of fire under the Zimbra team.
Other than that it appears mostly much of a muchness and it'll be interesting to watch how it evolves. Hopefully competition from Zextras has lit a bit of fire under the Zimbra team.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 2747
- Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:35 am
- Location: France - Drôme
- ZCS/ZD Version: All of them
- Contact:
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
I see video/chat is now SaaS and not in the self-hosted anymore (it's https://immail.ca/, based on the installation documentation).
If this is the case (if I understood properly), ZCS lost its "on premise" advantage and full GDPR compliance.
Could someone from Synacor please tell me I'm wrong?
If this is the case (if I understood properly), ZCS lost its "on premise" advantage and full GDPR compliance.
Could someone from Synacor please tell me I'm wrong?
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
Klug wrote:I see video/chat is now SaaS and not in the self-hosted anymore (it's https://immail.ca/, based on the installation documentation).
If this is the case (if I understood properly), ZCS lost its "on premise" advantage and full GDPR compliance.
Could someone from Synacor please tell me I'm wrong?
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
Looks like it.BradC wrote:The Zextras tools (or the -ng extensions) enabled the commonly promoted "side by side" migration. I've spent a few hours having a look at v10 today and it appears it's back to the old clunky zimbra backup, which is not real time and only good for DR if you make frequent local copies of the redo logs. So that's a significant regression on the -ng backup along with making migrations more difficult.
Other than that it appears mostly much of a muchness and it'll be interesting to watch how it evolves. Hopefully competition from Zextras has lit a bit of fire under the Zimbra team.
Not even recovery inbox that I deleted 5 minutes ago. According to the manual only through the dumpster.
Join the Zimbra community on Telegram: https://t.me/zimbra_community
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
Thanks for pointing this out, I'm so disappointed to hear this. Ngbackup was the one solidly good thing (to me) that came from upgrading to 8.8.15...BradC wrote: ↑Thu Mar 09, 2023 9:11 am The Zextras tools (or the -ng extensions) enabled the commonly promoted "side by side" migration. I've spent a few hours having a look at v10 today and it appears it's back to the old clunky zimbra backup, which is not real time and only good for DR if you make frequent local copies of the redo logs. So that's a significant regression on the -ng backup along with making migrations more difficult.
Other than that it appears mostly much of a muchness and it'll be interesting to watch how it evolves. Hopefully competition from Zextras has lit a bit of fire under the Zimbra team.
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
I'm also a user of the OSS version of ZCS plus the Zextras packages. I've recently posted a question about a version of Zextras for the new ZCS 10 and the reply wasn't very encouraging. If anyone want to see the reply from the Zextras team then it's here: https://community.zextras.com/forum/zex ... zimbra-10/
If there is no possibility of getting a 'proper' backup solution in the OSS version then it may be time for me to look for a product with a more professional attitude than the one they currently have about ZCS 10 and their lack of commitment to it being available to the many users of this product.
If there is no possibility of getting a 'proper' backup solution in the OSS version then it may be time for me to look for a product with a more professional attitude than the one they currently have about ZCS 10 and their lack of commitment to it being available to the many users of this product.
- JDunphy
- Outstanding Member
- Posts: 889
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 11:18 pm
- Location: Victoria, BC
- ZCS/ZD Version: 9.0.0_P39 NETWORK Edition
Re: Zimbra 10 (Daffodil)
Hey Bill,
Well stated. I wouldn't move us to version 9 because there was no FOSS binaries from Zimbra which I felt increased our risk. We have paid since 2005 for the Network version but Zimbra 10 isn't a step forward IMHO and in Dec 2023, I will have some serious concerns to finally address when they EOL the 8.8.15 product line. The timing around a holiday is further proof they just don't understand the enterprise email market. BTW, the Carbonio fork and now the rewrite is looking more viable especially from a 5 page PDF feature sheet I saw yesterday during one of their webinars. I have never used their products other than what I saw in 8.8.15 in some admin modules so have not been a customer of zextra's but appreciated them nonetheless because of how strong they made the zimbra ecosystem with the quality of options should a companies requirements change. Having both companies made the Zimbra product stronger IMHO.
I think Zimbra has a significant problem with Zimbra 10 GA. I spun it up yesterday and unless something changes, a lot of admin's will have some soul searching to do this year. IMHO, any product in 2023 that doesn't offer some way to backup/import/export your data and attempts to lock you in and holds your data hostage should not be a company you do business with. Our users here average over 100GB each and we have to back that up with daily strategies off site that mitigates risk against all kind of threats including ransomeware, loss of a data center, etc, etc. That patches have broken an enterprise grade mail system (8.8.15P20 anyone) and their standard disclaimer is you SHOULD backup all data first tells you how important having a fast and good backup system is for the product.
Finally, here is a warning shot that should scare any business given what happened during the verison 9 updates when FOSS builds broke and admin's could not patch 0-day exploits as a result for at least a month if memory serves.
For now, I am hoping that big changes/security/backup features are coming to Zimbra and they will find their way back to Open Source given how much the product is built on the work of other open source projects. There have been a lot of positive changes in the past year but not providing FOSS binaries isn't one of them.
Jim
Well stated. I wouldn't move us to version 9 because there was no FOSS binaries from Zimbra which I felt increased our risk. We have paid since 2005 for the Network version but Zimbra 10 isn't a step forward IMHO and in Dec 2023, I will have some serious concerns to finally address when they EOL the 8.8.15 product line. The timing around a holiday is further proof they just don't understand the enterprise email market. BTW, the Carbonio fork and now the rewrite is looking more viable especially from a 5 page PDF feature sheet I saw yesterday during one of their webinars. I have never used their products other than what I saw in 8.8.15 in some admin modules so have not been a customer of zextra's but appreciated them nonetheless because of how strong they made the zimbra ecosystem with the quality of options should a companies requirements change. Having both companies made the Zimbra product stronger IMHO.
I think Zimbra has a significant problem with Zimbra 10 GA. I spun it up yesterday and unless something changes, a lot of admin's will have some soul searching to do this year. IMHO, any product in 2023 that doesn't offer some way to backup/import/export your data and attempts to lock you in and holds your data hostage should not be a company you do business with. Our users here average over 100GB each and we have to back that up with daily strategies off site that mitigates risk against all kind of threats including ransomeware, loss of a data center, etc, etc. That patches have broken an enterprise grade mail system (8.8.15P20 anyone) and their standard disclaimer is you SHOULD backup all data first tells you how important having a fast and good backup system is for the product.
Finally, here is a warning shot that should scare any business given what happened during the verison 9 updates when FOSS builds broke and admin's could not patch 0-day exploits as a result for at least a month if memory serves.
Correct me if I am wrong but they don't test FOSS versions but they test overlaying on top of a Network install? Oddly enough, it failed for me with 8.8.15 Network when I tested it against 8.8.15 FOSS because of an ldap schema error that took some digging into to resolve.https://zimbra.github.io/documentation/zimbra-10/single-server-install.html#_license wrote: Zimbra 10 does not include a FOSS binary release; therefore, there is no mechanism to fallback to FOSS. If the license ending date has passed, the 30 day grace period has expired, and users decide not to obtain a new license, they can resolve these issues by building the Zimbra 10 binaries and installing them on top of their existing Zimbra 10 system.
For now, I am hoping that big changes/security/backup features are coming to Zimbra and they will find their way back to Open Source given how much the product is built on the work of other open source projects. There have been a lot of positive changes in the past year but not providing FOSS binaries isn't one of them.
Jim