FreeNAS 11.0 Release Candidate Up For Testing

[phoronix]

Phoronix: FreeNAS 11.0 Release Candidate Up For Testing

For those looking toward a new NAS (Network Attached Storage) operating system, the FreeBSD-powered FreeNAS 11.0 is nearing release...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=FreeNAS-11.0-RC1

[GruenSein]

I can only advice everyone to exercise extreme caution in reference to new FreeNAS releases. Even stable releases don't cary much weight as it became evident a few weeks ago when - after months if not years of development, alpha and beta releases and RCs - FreeNAS 10 (Corral) was abruptly discontinued and marked obsolete without even the slightest chance to receive maintainance updates only a month after the stable release of this major revision. FreeNAS 11 is nothing but a rebranded 9.10.X release, which makes matters worse since it lacks a lot of features that made people switch to Corral in the first place.

[Trevelyan]

I never see any stories about OpenMediaVault. In my opinion it is a much better option for a home NAS. I also use it in work when it fits a need.

[jhixson74]

I can only advice everyone to exercise extreme caution in reference to new FreeNAS releases. Even stable releases don't cary much weight as it became evident a few weeks ago when - after months if not years of development, alpha and beta releases and RCs - FreeNAS 10 (Corral) was abruptly discontinued and marked obsolete without even the slightest chance to receive maintainance updates only a month after the stable release of this major revision. FreeNAS 11 is nothing but a rebranded 9.10.X release, which makes matters worse since it lacks a lot of features that made people switch to Corral in the first place.

The FreeNAS 9.x series that is going into 11 has no relation to Corral other than name, so the FUD isn't necessary. FreeNAS 9.x has been stable for a very long time, and will continue to be so moving forward into 11. FreeNAS Corral was a science experiment gone bad. It was fundamentally broken in every way you can't imagine. It might bother you now that it happened, but better now than later when more people lost data and/or their data was corrupted. As for a "rebranded", there is no rebranding here, FreeNAS is just returning to what it always has done: Track FreeBSD version and be a solid, stable and reliable solution for people. So don't spread FUD just because Corral was scrapped.

[GruenSein]

The FreeNAS 9.x series that is going into 11 has no relation to Corral other than name, so the FUD isn't necessary. FreeNAS 9.x has been stable for a very long time, and will continue to be so moving forward into 11. FreeNAS Corral was a science experiment gone bad. It was fundamentally broken in every way you can't imagine. It might bother you now that it happened, but better now than later when more people lost data and/or their data was corrupted. As for a "rebranded", there is no rebranding here, FreeNAS is just returning to what it always has done: Track FreeBSD version and be a solid, stable and reliable solution for people. So don't spread FUD just because Corral was scrapped.

Please reread my comment and don't call things FUD that are actually confusing/misleading due to the severe mistakes in project management and communication from the developers. Don't get me wrong: I don't criticize experimental software projects as Corral might have been. What I criticize is releasing it as stable when it apparently wasn't and there was no plan to continue working on it.
So the following is the current situation: There was a stable release. It got scrapped a few weeks later. This new version 11 used to be called 9.10.3 so this is definitely a rebranding scheme to imply progress while - as you stated correctly - it is actually a step backwards to the 9.10.X series with an updated base OS. You might find this suiting your needs and like the tried and tested nature of this software. However, it is lacking some functionality of FreeNAS 10 (Corral) which one might not expect from a subsequent release.

[jhixson74]

Please reread my comment and don't call things FUD that are actually confusing/misleading due to the severe mistakes in project management and communication from the developers. Don't get me wrong: I don't criticize experimental software projects as Corral might have been. What I criticize is releasing it as stable when it apparently wasn't and there was no plan to continue working on it until it was.
So the following is the current situation: There was a stable release. It got scraped a few weeks later. This new version 11 used to be called 9.10.3 so this is definitely a rebranding scheme to imply progress while - as you stated correctly - it is actually a step backwards to the 9.10.X series with an updated base OS. You might find this suiting your needs and like the tried and tested nature of this software. However, it is lacking some functionality of FreeNAS 10 (Corral) which one might not expect from a subsequent release.

I'm not here to argue, I just don't appreciate the misinformation you are spreading. "rebranding" is not meant to imply progress. Progress is most definitely happening, a name change is not necessary to indicate that. Take a look at the RC and it will speak for itself. I'd like to know how using 9.10.X (or 11) is a "step backwards" ? Corral /did not work/, /was broken/, was a major disaster, etc. If you consider a steaming pile of crap superior to something stable, solid and reliable, well I don't know what to say. The only thing Corral provided not in FreeNAS is docker containers. That's it. Corral was nowhere near at feature parity with FreeNAS, and the few things it did have were buggy and/or broken. So back to my original point: Don't try to scare people away from FreeNAS because Corral flopped.

[mold]

The only thing Corral provided not in FreeNAS is docker containers. That's it.

Definitely not. There were other features. To me, the most interesting improvement in Corral was the ability to run multiple background tasks, the progress of which was displayed in a column to the right. You no longer had to wait for a progress bar to complete but could keep working and add tasks to the queue. This might be called a non-blocking UI? Also, the visual and interface design could be considered a feature that would have put FreeNAS years ahead of competitors.

My quick speculations on the failure of Corral (1) The Corral interface was beautiful and therefore contentious. I'm not involved in the project but I know how Puritan technical users can be. In the end, the users would have adapted to a better design and never looked back. (2) Substantial technical issues with the Corral direction. If this is the case then those hurdles must be really high, given the time they sunk into Corral. (3) Reportedly the project lead quit. I don't believe this could derail a project unless literally everyone else involved in FreeNAS is ignorant or dead set against the direction (see #1.)
So I'm thinking the engineers just didn't like the pretty interface.
Anyways, too bad about Corral. FreeNAS has been great and it was sad and surprising to see Corral abandoned.

[GruenSein]

I'm not here to argue, I just don't appreciate the misinformation you are spreading. "rebranding" is not meant to imply progress. Progress is most definitely happening, a name change is not necessary to indicate that. Take a look at the RC and it will speak for itself. I'd like to know how using 9.10.X (or 11) is a "step backwards" ? Corral /did not work/, /was broken/, was a major disaster, etc. If you consider a steaming pile of crap superior to something stable, solid and reliable, well I don't know what to say. The only thing Corral provided not in FreeNAS is docker containers. That's it. Corral was nowhere near at feature parity with FreeNAS, and the few things it did have were buggy and/or broken. So back to my original point: Don't try to scare people away from FreeNAS because Corral flopped.

If the FreeNAS developers don't want users to be sceptical they simply should't release "broken, major disaster" - your words, not mine - software as a stable release, advertise it as a major step forward, and drop support so soon. This might not be a problem for you but others disagree. Feel free to browse the FreeNAS forums to get an idea about how this move is received. Also, I don't care if you don't want to call the naming scheme "rebranding" or not even though it did actually appear as 9.10.3 on the update train. Sticking to this name would've been a lot more honest IMHO. Fact of the matter is that v11 is not a subsequent release of v10 extending its features but is based on the v9.X. with a new coat of paint. It is different from what users might have liked in v10 in many ways. Some of the missing features were pointed out already. To me, the constitutes a step backwards. If you don't need those and the rest works for you: Great.

[jhixson74]

If the FreeNAS developers don't want users to be sceptical they simply should't release "broken, major disaster" - your words, not mine - software as a stable release, advertise it as a major step forward, and drop support so soon. This might not be a problem for you but others disagree. Feel free to browse the FreeNAS forums to get an idea about how this move is received. Also, I don't care if you don't want to call the naming scheme "rebranding" or not even though it did actually appear as 9.10.3 on the update train. Sticking to this name would've been a lot more honest IMHO. Fact of the matter is that v11 is not a subsequent release of v10 extending its features but is based on the v9.X. with a new coat of paint. It is different from what users might have liked in v10 in many ways. Some of the missing features were pointed out already. To me, the constitutes a step backwards. If you don't need those and the rest works for you: Great.

Nothing dishonest is occurring here. FreeNAS formally followed FreeBSD naming. Internal politics prevented FreeNAS from going to 10, hence the stupid 9.10 name. Internal issues are now resolved, and FreeNAS can move back to original naming convention. This isn't being dishonest. And yes, 11 is the next major release of 9.10, what exactly is wrong with that? Nobody is arguing it isn't except you. Fresh coat of paint? Software evolves, it is very rarely rewritten, I see no problem here. As for asynchronous UI (That is what the other poster was trying to name), that is being worked on. There is already an asynchronous middleware in place. It is not Corral, nor is it trying to be Corral. I consider that a good thing. Again, Corral had nowhere near the feature parity that 9.x did, not even close. What features it did have were broken, so again, this is not a "step down" as you continue to presume. As for Corral being released prematurely, the mistake was owned up too and an apology issued, what more do you want? There was a lot more than the "lead" leaving that took place here, so people need to stop speculating about what happened and just accept that Corral is dead and for the better.

[Dharc]

Lesson learned: never hire a man just because he has worked for a big company, says he knows a lot and has big experience, ask people to trust in what he is doing because he worked for that company before and promises unviable things like porting stuff from his old employer, just because he was the creator of the project which basis yours.