BlackBox Framework Center

Here is a review that is not so positive (though there are other positive reviews of Edis on the same forum):

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1230425

cfbsoftware wrote:Here is a review that is not so positive (though there are other positive reviews of Edis on the same forum):

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1230425

I have just read it. That seems like uncommon case. We will be from the customers who are "only lightly-used their products" if we will choose Edis.

cfbsoftware wrote:Here is a review that is not so positive (though there are other positive reviews of Edis on the same forum):

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1230425

For EDIS vServer there is only 1 IP adress offered as stated in the data sheet.
It is also stated that you cannot modify the kernel of a vServer.
So there is no reason to complain about that.

Regarding the install and boot problems:
This is exactly the reason why I would never go with KVM but try
to stick with vServer. It is a lot easier to administer and we really don't need
to tweak the kernel. It is also the cheapest offering and the most efficient one
because it is based on a virtualization context rather than on a full virtualization.

- Josef

Ivan Denisov wrote:EDIS looks very good, because they are suggesting Virtual Dedicated Server (Dedicated Hosting, hosting types), that means that we can install any software on server side combining different serving software: Apache2 for PHP, Unicorn for Ruby (in future BlackBox Server for some BlackBox services...). In the Douglas table there are hosting companies that suggesting "Shared Hosting". It is good if we want to have more space with less money and easy hosting control panel, but do not need flexibility.

However, for good performance (with Ubuntu server) at Edis we need KVM Starter for € 6,49... but we can try less. FreeBSD OS will give better performance in less powerful hosting.

I am not convinced that we need Ubuntu and thus KVM.
I would choose a simpler Debian and start with a very small vServer.
You may be surprised what Linux can do with limited RAM.
(If we need a large server for promoting a small system,
there may be something wrong.)
It is also not clear how the memory quota is handled. Does it include the
shared Kernel space? Probably not. I guess it will count only the user programs.

One important thing to be prepared for the future is to check if wine runs well
under a vServer. With wine available, we can run BlackBox. I have tested this
under Oracle VirtualBox running a Debian machine and it worked just fine.

- Josef

Yes, we can start with very small vServer and Debian is better. You are right.

I contacted Jürg Gutknecht about web sites in Switzerland and here is his response.
"Dear Douglas

thanks for your infos. I have heard this earlier with regret of course.

Would Felix please check this out and answer?

With my best regards,
--Jürg Gutknecht

"
Here was my message to him
" Dr Gutknecht,

I do not know if you are aware of the fact that Oberon Microsystems has decided to stop
supporting BlackBox/Component Pascal and has turned over the reins to the user community.

I am a member of a loose association called the BlackBox Center (there are about 10 of us).
We are attempting to locate a Web site for hosting the current BB1.6 version and future
versions along with documentation and good software control management.

Your minimal involvement in this process would be greatly appreciated. For example, do
you know of a reputable service provider in Switzerland that we could contact? For that
matter (I hesitate to ask) is it possible that ETHZ could host our (not for profit) work?

I look forward to your comments.

Best regards,
Douglas G Danforth, Ph.D.
Palo, Alto, CA, USA

"

Here is the response that I received from Felix

"Dear Douglas,

I would suggest that you take the ocp (oberon community platform) wiki at http://www.ocp.inf.ethz.ch/wiki/ for documentation and linking. Moreover, we can then set up a repository that can be used to download all the tools.
At the moment I am too busy to set it up, but by end of next week it should be possible.
Please send me a reminder in case I forget. Meanwhile you may want to think about the idea.

Best
Felix
"

What do you think about this? Should we pursue using ETHZ as our 'center'?

DGDanforth wrote:What do you think about this? Should we pursue using ETHZ as our 'center'?

I do not like this idea. The reasons are:
1. We can do it all better
2. We should not depend of people who are not in the Center

Ivan Denisov wrote:

DGDanforth wrote:What do you think about this? Should we pursue using ETHZ as our 'center'?

I do not like this idea. The reasons are:
1. We can do it all better
2. We should not depend of people who are not in the Center

1. Are we limited at all by having ETHZ host the center? That needs to be investigated.
2. 'who are not in the Center', well, we are all dependent upon the origins of Oberon
and the work of Nicklaus Wirth.

Pros:
o Free hosting (I believe).
o Name recognition and Center status enhancement.
o Closer connection to possible future enhancement in ETHZ technology.

Cons:
o Disk space?
o Tools?

Let's keep pushing this. It seems like the logical choice to me.
Do we need a vote to get everyone in the Center involved?

PS: I like their forum look and feel.

If they are ready to support us with hosting, to maintain in ETH our forum, wiki, bugtracker, GIT repository mirror, ... that will be good. But I think that we will not have such server administration freedom there.