Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-15 Thread davesamcdxv

Yeah, just don't expect privacy.

And having said that there are a lot of uses in which on is fine without it,  
just like how CCTVs might not be in one's house, but the police have a right  
to put them in public places. The important thing is users have the right to  
privately store it and thankfully that can still be practiced. Practicing  
that right isn't exactly a 10-year-old outdated thing.


Having said that, regarding the, ahem, server thing, yeah...I think there  
should be a server ISO.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-15 Thread simonafreeman

What's wrong with this:

https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/server

And then building from this platform up?  


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-14 Thread shiretoko

Can you explain what a 'docker container' is? Never heard of it.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-14 Thread tegskywalker

http://www.docker.com/whatisdocker/

There are containers for Ubuntu and would be nice for Trisquel as well.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-14 Thread tegskywalker
I would never use cloud services for my personal files, but I see the value  
for web sites that may benefit from potential scalability.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-14 Thread t8mf4nu6lizp
 I swear most of you free software evangelists are stuck in your ways with  
viewpoints that are over a decade old.

Like time-sharing and main frame computers?

 What is wrong with deploying a Docker container on a hosting company if you  
have total control of that container?

The point is you never have total control if somebody else is hosting it.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-14 Thread tegskywalker
Well, someone has to host it as most ISPs will not allow you to host a  
website from your home.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-14 Thread shiretoko
A self-hosted cloud isn't the same as a self-hosted website since you're the  
only one accessing it from outside and hence traffic is lower. Most isp allow  
it i guess.
The real problem is that it's a pain in the neck setting it up und  
maintaining the cloud in a secure way.
You have enough problems in your daily life and don't want to bother with  
updates for your cloud installation, server security, bugs and last but not  
least hardware issues of your server.


If you're privacy concerned, why not use encryption instead.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-13 Thread superbyelich

I agree with fr33dom,

We should shy away from cloud-based computing because by promoting it, we are  
promoting the control over others.  Setting up one's own server and own  
personal cloud is a way to fight this.


Peace,
grimlok


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-13 Thread tegskywalker
I swear most of you free software evangelists are stuck in your ways with  
viewpoints that are over a decade old. What is wrong with deploying a Docker  
container on a hosting company if you have total control of that container?


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-13 Thread jason
I don't think people need help (i.e. hosting companies) putting their e-mail,  
photos, videos, calendars, address books, messages, documents (and whatever  
else they might put on their server) to third parties. The Internet-using  
public already seems exceedingly efficient at doing that. Rather,  
self-hosting is the solution to the problems we experience of today  
(reference NSA), not continuing to outsource it. Please remember that such  
outsourcing is one of the two critical things that made mass surveillance  
possible. Despite this, some seem to think there is some magic way, that if  
it can just be done right somehow that a way could be found to both  
outsource their stuff and respect people's freedom, autonomy, and privacy all  
at the same time but it just isn't true. You can't both give your data to  
someone else and keep it at the same time.


[Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-12 Thread tegskywalker
Trisquel at this point is pretty much a desktop only OS that cleans out the  
Ubuntu install and changes around some packages while blacklisting others.  
Its nice to have a libre desktop and all, but the developers should take the  
server space more seriously too.


I'm talking maybe a server ISO (like Ubuntu) and some official Docker  
containers. Since most of computing is moving to the cloud with our data  
being used and processed on the server, it would be nice to have the Trisquel  
team take that seriously. I would love for hosting companies like AWS,  
Digital Ocean, and Rackspace to deploy server images of Trisquel alongside  
CentOS and Ubuntu. Maybe they would consider it if the effort was put in by  
Ruben and others here to sustain it.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-12 Thread tegskywalker
Good for you. I can do the same thing, but hosting places want autonomy and  
simplicity with a pre-built image.


Re: [Trisquel-users] More focus should be put on server installations

2014-11-12 Thread fr33domlover
On 2014-11-12
tegskywal...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Good for you. I can do the same thing, but hosting places want autonomy and  
 simplicity with a pre-built image.

That's exactly why we have our own home servers - we can control what we put
there. Ruben already does a lot of work, I wouldn't add more burden. If you
feel what Trisquel offers isn't enougn for servers - maybe talk to your VPS
provider.

Personally I'm against the movement to the cloud and against centralization, so
to me Trisquel is an excellent server solution just like Debian.

If hosting providers want simplicity - they are free to get it for themselves
using their full-time paid developers :-)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature