Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:03:26 -0500
From:  "Lucas Peyatt - Ohio Web Hosting & Development" <bluequartz (at mark) ohiowebhosting.net>
Subject:  [coba-e:15024] Re: Rant about BlueQuartz
To:  coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org
Message-Id:  <20090213005206.M23185 (at mark) ohiowebhosting.net>
In-Reply-To:  <MDBBJOLNBOKHEDFALKJFMEHEAEAC.grossj (at mark) constantino.net>
References:  <49940567.7030901 (at mark) dogsbody.org> <MDBBJOLNBOKHEDFALKJFMEHEAEAC.grossj (at mark) constantino.net>
X-Mail-Count: 15024

It may not be completely dead, but "the writing is on the wall".

BQ is based on CentOS 4 and that is getting older and older, eventually it will 
not be supported by the CentOS "company"

BQ is based on PHP4 that has been discontinued.

I have seen more progress with BlueOnyx in one month then I have seen in a year 
with BlueQuartz.

On the other hand BlueOnyx is Based on CentOS 5.2, has PHP5, MySQL 5, 
Squirrelmail, Nuonce Subdomains, and much more.

These are just my opinions, I still use BlueQuartz, I hope it does not 
completely stagnate and die. But BlueOnyx is more or less better in almost 
every category, the only issue is the incompatibilities with existing software 
packages (Nuonce & others)


On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:43:35 -0600, Jimmy Gross wrote
> I have not seen anything concrete that says Blue Quartz is dead. Yes, Brian
> shut down Nuonce. Michael and some others have started Blue Onyx.
> 
> I have not seen anything from Hisao saying he is not going to work on 
> the BQ project.
> 
> Michael at Solar Speed is still selling BQ servers and software.
> 
> I think you may be jumping the gun a little bit assuming Blue Quartz is
> dead.
> 
> I just did a yum update and and two updates appeared in my queue so it 
> would seem that BQ is not quite dead yet.
> 
> jimmy
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dogsbody [mailto:dan (at mark) dogsbody.org]
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 5:18 AM
> To: coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org
> Subject: [coba-e:15019] Re: Rant about BlueQuartz
> 
> > I'm not advocating that all BQ users jump ship to BX this instant.   I
> > think I'm more saying I'm not sure I would recommend another BQ
> > installation if you were putting up a new box.
> 
> Chris, I don't think anyone is arguing with you regarding a new box and
> I realise that moving from CentOS4 to CentOS5 requires a fresh install.
>   The difference is that CentOS4 is still supported while BlueQuartz isn't!
> 
> It would be nice to move from one supported product to another 
> supported product instead of what has happened now where all updates 
> have stopped for BQ forcing us to move to BX immediately.  BlueQuartz 
> has basically done a Cobalt!!
> 
> I am currently turning customers away because I don't have the time to
> setup new BQ servers and I certainly don't have time to buy new servers
> and migrate everyone to BX immediately.
> 
> My point in particular was that ALL of this was avoidable!!!  It should
> have been BlueQuartz that ventured into Centos5, instead they killed it!
> 
> > Thank GOODNESS that those involved didn't just give up and walk away.
> 
> IMHO I think most of them did!  Not knocking anyone that is still here,
> as has been said many many times, you are all amazing and I truly
> believe that.  We have still lost one hell of a lot of talent though
> from helpers on the mailing list to developers to people that could 
> have just helped raise bugs..... GONE
> 
> Dan


--
Lucas Peyatt
Ohio Web Hosting & Development
lucas (at mark) ohiowebhosting.net
www.ohiowebhosting.net
937.969.4476 dayton
614.441.8169 columbus
513.258.2376 cincinnati
206.350.1292 facsimile