What is the future for Legacy DirectAdmin License holders?

[bertvandepoel]

I've pointed this out in my post in great detail. The main issue here is communication: no email when the rules change, no clear communication what the plan is for the future (so we know what to expect) and no reaction from DirectAdmin either. Our business is feeling completely ignored by DirectAdmin and we are unsure what we will do once MariaDB 10.6 loses support.

 

[faithalone]

I've pointed this out in my post in great detail. The main issue here is communication: no email when the rules change, no clear communication what the plan is for the future (so we know what to expect) and no reaction from DirectAdmin either. Our business is feeling completely ignored by DirectAdmin and we are unsure what we will do once MariaDB 10.6 loses support.

Strange way of doing business and getting easy more money if they wanted

 

[beansbaxter]

If I understand correctly, the big problem is not the LLH's, but the illegal (re)selling of those licenses (or accounts), which prevents the required income. And that seems to be a very big problem.

Then DA should impose strict guidelines and prevention measures to mitigate this... and not punish those who want to continue using what we purchased.

 

[raqdedicados]

Hi there, has anybody experience this ? The sever was running fine, then whe upgrade da as usual and now we got this beatyfull message.
I already know that da legacy licence will not support mariadb new versions but new os ? this is new

 

[Richard G]

this is new

Yes that's odd, as we just installed a couple of servers with Almalinux 9 on it which is also in RHEL9 based.
Exactly which version upgrade did you do? Real RHEL of Alma or Rock and 8 to 9, or minor like 9.1 to 9.2 or what exactly?
Just read in your other topic it was a DA update. Very odd.

 

[beansbaxter]

Just logged into my DA Client Area, and RHEL 9 system is no longer a supported operating system...

Support for RHEL 8 ends in May 2024.

In 5 months, there will be no more support?

Now what do we do?

 

[Zhenyapan]

@beansbaxter you can use almalinux, it rhel based: https://endoflife.date/almalinux

 

[ccto]

It worked.
ref.:

legacy code-base does not support rhel9 system,

HI there We re getting this error on a server that was running fine, we know that legacy licences does not support new mariadb but almalinux 9 ? I think this is an unfair practice... does someone got the same message ? do u know what to do ? we do not want to re install .... it was working fine...

forum.directadmin.com

Hi there, has anybody experience this ? The sever was running fine, then whe upgrade da as usual and now we got this beatyfull message.
I already know that da legacy licence will not support mariadb new versions but new os ? this is new

 

[netswitch]

Is fixed in between :

This message was caused due to an error from our side. It affected only a handful of servers and is already resolved.

But it shows the extent of the features aldready built into the "new codebase" to kill LLH...

 

[Stije]

MariaDB decided to go from a Mysql addon to a seperate database system

but this is since mariadb5.5 already.

I don't understand why we are not allowed to install mariadb 10.11 manual. If i want to use mariadb 10.11 without custombuild support i should be able to do this.
Also this message of RHEL9 (although fixed) not working seems that at a certain point you cannot use anything unless you upgrade the license. If you have a lot of servers this is a pretty big deal. I am ok with the license action, but to have basic software like database server, that you cannot upgrade anymore is annoying.

 

[Richard G]

but this is since mariadb5.5 already.

It was still a drop-in replacement for mysql. It's not realyl a seperate database yet but the functions are really starting to get more seperated since 10.3 if I'm not mistaken when they started to use the Aria engine in 10.4 as far as I've read. I don't know how that compares to the 5.x branch as I never used that.

why we are not allowed to install mariadb 10.11 manual.

I don't know either, but I can imagine that it has to do with DA integration for things maybe like accounts, webmail and such.
Agreed about what you're saying. IMHO it's basic software, if they want to get a payment, they should thing of another solution then suddenly stop basic required software updates. There is talk about various ideas and solutions but nothing decided yet and as long as nothing else is decided the current situation is in place.
But we have time. Because 10.6 goes EOL in 2026 and I don't think anybody really requires 10.11 within the next couple of months. Just my 2 cents.

 

[user8394]

I don't understand why we are not allowed to install mariadb 10.11 manual. If i want to use mariadb 10.11 without custombuild support i should be able to do this.
Also this message of RHEL9 (although fixed) not working seems that at a certain point you cannot use anything unless you upgrade the license. If you have a lot of servers this is a pretty big deal. I am ok with the license action, but to have basic software like database server, that you cannot upgrade anymore is annoying.

Exactly this. I was also trying to install MariaDB 10.11 standalone (with CloudLinux DBGovernor). As it's standalone, nothing has to be to maintained or integrated by DirectAdmin, but still DirectAdmin doesn't work after I install this version.

I don't know either, but I can imagine that it has to do with DA integration for things maybe like accounts, webmail and such.

I almost can't image that this is the case. It looks like they are just proactively blocking this, which makes no sense for me.

The DirectAdmin staff reffered before to the licensing page where DirectAdmin wrote the following:

Users of legacy licenses may continue to run the DirectAdmin service with the understanding that their codebase will receive limited maintenance.

In this case it's no maintenance or new versions, as the software is standalone installed. So I don't expect MariaDB 10.11 to be integrated in Custombuild for legacy licenses, but please don't block it if decide to install it by myself.

 

[Richard G]

I almost can't image that this is the case.

Why not? You also know by a fact that Roundcube is making use of the MariaDB database and is installed by DA into MariaDB.

In this case it's no maintenance or new versions,

That's in fact incorrect. Because there are new versions for example of php and also updates. Even with DA 1.657 they made it possible to use PHP versions lower than 8.1 to be used on systems with openssl 3.x. So there are new versions and there is maintenance.

It's only not the new version we would like to see, that's a difference.

but please don't block it if decide to install it by myself.

That I can agree with, on one's own risk ofcourse.

 

[user8394]

Why not? You also know by a fact that Roundcube is making use of the MariaDB database and is installed by DA into MariaDB.

So you're saying that you think DirectAdmin is blocking my legacy license, because my own installed MariaDB 10.11 will not work with the latest Roundcube? I checked the Roundcube changelog, but as far as I can see there are no specific changes made for MariaDB 10.11.
For me it feels more like that DirectAdmin is trying to give us a hard time and wants us to upgrade the license.

That's in fact incorrect. Because there are new versions for example of php and also updates. Even with DA 1.657 they made it possible to use PHP versions lower than 8.1 to be used on systems with openssl 3.x. So there are new versions and there is maintenance.

In this case I was referring to MariaDB 10.11 specific. Their quote from their licensing page doesn't apply here, as I install MariaDB 10.11 as standalone by myself. There is no maintenance needed from them for my standalone database, as it's not installed from Custombuild.

 

[Richard G]

So you're saying that you think

No you are misunderstanding my reply.

I can imagine that it has to do with DA integration for things maybe like accounts, webmail and such.

You replied with:

I almost can't image that this is the case.

So I explained:

Why not? You also know by a fact that Roundcube is making use of the MariaDB database and is installed by DA into MariaDB.

Because I wondered why you can't imagine that it had to do with DA integration with Mariadb like my reply said. Because that's what we're talking about.

I didn't say anything about a manual installation not working with Roundcube. I was trying to explain that DA was using MariaDB for it. Meaning most likely DA would not use a manual installation to setup Roundcube in it. Probably because it's using it's own procedures and checks for it.
Which could be a reason to not allow manual installation as it might conflict with other things.
I'm not saying this is the case, but it could very well be.

Their quote from their licensing page doesn't apply here

It does, because you can't split up quotes into parts you just want to use. It's just 1 line belonging together.

that their codebase will receive limited maintenance.

The codebase exists out of many things and it's limited maintenance (it doesn't even says upgrades there), so it's to their choice which limitations they will use and it can be anything. So now they decided to give maintance to MariaDB but not support an upgrade anymore.
If you think it doesn't apply, I would suggest to ask a person with a bit more legal knowledge.

Are we happy with this situation? Ofcourse not! But your argument is invalid (unfortunately).

 

[johannes]

Then they should clearly communicate it, which parts of DA may are not compatible with higher MariaDB versions, so that the community can find ways around.
And they should communicate, whey they are blocking higher MariaDB versions, at all.

 

[user8394]

No you are misunderstanding my reply.

That quote started with a reply from you on on Stije's comment, regarding MariaDB 10.11

why we are not allowed to install mariadb 10.11 manual

Where you're replying:

I don't know either, but I can imagine that it has to do with DA integration for things maybe like accounts, webmail and such.

I don't how how I misunderstand this, but if I read it again without what you're telling me now, it looks like you understand why a standalone MariaDB 10.11 is not possible, because of the DA integration with webmail and other stuff. I was just saying that I don't think that's the case in my opinion. But now I know what you mean.

Perhaps also good to know that a manual (standalone MariaDB/MySQL) have always worked (and still does, expect MariaDB 10.11 + legacy license).

The codebase exists out of many things and it's limited maintenance (it doesn't even says upgrades there), so it's to their choice which limitations they will use and it can be anything. So now they decided to give maintance to MariaDB but not support an upgrade anymore.
If you think it doesn't apply, I would suggest to ask a person with a bit more legal knowledge.

As I said before, I don't expect maintenance for newer MariaDB versions with their legacy license. But blocking a standalone install is something different than not giving maintenance to legacy licenses.
They are saying here that I will not get maintenance. Ok fine, but blocking my standalone version of MariaDB is something completely different what is not stated anywhere. I paid for my legacy licenses and they can't just deactivate my DA box just because I have my own MariaDB. I hope you get my point.

 

[Richard G]

Perhaps also good to know that a manual (standalone MariaDB/MySQL) have always worked (and still does, expect MariaDB 10.11 + legacy license).

That is indeed good to know. It was not known to me that a manual installation was ever used, due to the fact hat DA normally installs Mariadb/Mysql.

If that is indeed the case, then they might blocked MariaDB 10.11 manual installation to prevent the manual installation as a workaround. I'm not sure about that either, but it's a possibility.
Another possibility is that this started with the codebase change legacy/modern. I don't know until when a manual installation was possible.

However, in spite of when the blocking started, I do agree that blocking things should not be done and that it's different than giving or giving not maintenance to legacy licenses.
So yes I understand what you mean now and get your point and totally agree with that.

 

[JosKlever]

I'm not 100% sure, but I think the legacy codebase is not compatible anymore with MariaDB 10.11 and the legacy code will not be updated anymore to rewrite it to make it compatible again. So DirectAdmin will break if the code can't interact with databases. This will happen with a manual update as well.

 

[Stije]

I'm not 100% sure, but I think the legacy codebase is not compatible anymore with MariaDB 10.11 and the legacy code will not be updated anymore to rewrite it to make it compatible again. So DirectAdmin will break if the code can't interact with databases. This will happen with a manual update as well.

Well it was working fine untill the taskq/license checker blocked me. But even if this was the case. It is still my choice to do it. If i want to install mariadb 10.11 i should be able to, even if it would break my control panel.

It just bugs me that i am not allowed to install it. Even if it breaks that is my choice. They also don't block me when i run my own redis or a db manager or other stuff that is in the "other license"
If something is not supported it does not mean they should block my license. PHP 5.x is not supported but i can still install it and i do not get a license error.

What happens now is that they give me the feeling that MariaDB10.11 is working fine with legacy codebase and therefor they block it. Because then everybody would keep their legacy or lifetime license longer. I am not saying this is true, it just feels this way.

This feeling I have is also because they say stuff and then change it. Like first they said with the lifetime license we do not remove them and we are not going to charge for updates. And, I quote: a promise is a promise. I do not have a LLH but still I can imagine how some people would have felt.

Also they said to mention if something would be available for legacy or not in the changelog but i don't see it.
They shoud just give us better updates about their planning what NOT will be included in the legacy license. This way we can make the choice sooner to switch to a new license if needed. If we need to move 50 servers to a new license for example we would like to know if and when. So we can plan and organise both in time and money.

A company needs to get money so everybody can eat I understand. And for me it is not the fact that the license changed this is all clear. What bugs me is the lack of clear answers and good explanations about their choices.