New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
I thought that CyberPanel is owned/supported/has some affiliation with Litespeed itself so I don't think that this a project that will die any time soon.
@ExonHost I’m not a big fan of litespeed but it’s always great to see new tools coming in. Everything looks lacking in early development in most proejcts (even cPanel v1.0 vs v77.0) but I’m guessing if it has a strong financial backup support, it can go far.
@zafouhar Oh, really? That’s cool. I didn’t read the whole thread just the first post. But if this is going to be another pay-to-use software, I’d rather pass and use a more established one just because of stability and functionality... the UI/UX design gave me a first impression that this thing needs a lot of works to be done before it can actually convince me to read more about the core features...
Ispmanager for 4 euro/m is way to go - very cheap with so many goodies. I will be staying away from cyber...enterprise if it wants to earn money before mind.
GTFO spammer
I just agreed with zafouhar and am giving you an alternative in case cyber... becomes a pay-to-use product because I love ispm.... after using for about 1 year.. You do not have to be rude like that.
I agree, the design is a bit.. it could improve I'd say, it looks very newbie
Actually, you agreed to me not zafouhar
Love to see people complaining about free products.
As far as we know, there wasn't any vulnerability with the panel, the performance is top notch, there are no major bugs that are known, it's completely open source and there were no intentions shown to make it into a paid product.
YET, you complain that you dislike the look of the UI, and that it doesn't look enterprise enough... Fork the project, change the design, and you are good to go.
Oops. Sorry.:-)
I will try it myself on one of my VMs. If it shows no vulnerabilities, bugs can be addressed rather easily, and the performance is on par, I may switch, saving 4 euro/m. :-)
I use it in more than 5 servers and I am really satifisfied with it, best free panel, that does not mean everything is perfect.
Vesta is so buggy but their interface is really neat
Actually, there's a difference between "complaining" and "giving (honest) feedback".
I don't think I have the time and energy to fork and change the design hence the "feedback" or if you prefer -- "complain". It's better this way so that the developers know what their users really like to see.
We know it's currently open-source but the confusion was when @ExonHost mentioned "They are going to release enterprise version with LiteSpeed Enterprise version support." hence the "pay-to-use" term for the enterprise version thus comparing it to other
enterprise grade" control panel such as ___(fill in the blank).
IMHO, the colors are too light/girlish-pastel and gives me that "weak" feeling. If I'm the lead UI/UX; I'll use a more solid and strong darker/bolder color - well this is rather subjective so you may have different opinion than mine so I rest my case and we have to agree to disagree...
Been using it together with ntcp and works great so far.
May I ask how long you have been using it, if you found any bugs so far, and if so, what are they.?
What is ntcp?
Interested. Bookmarked.
Massive drawback with OLS - only partially .htaccess support. If you have a ton of .htaccess files from Apache - convert them into OLS "context" is a nightmare.
Short for netcup
And install> @cyberpersons said:
Do you have an off-site back up option?
Never mind. I figured.
I do read suggestions/feedback and try to implement feasible features as soon as possible.
But I don't understand what do you mean by:
And yes the project is OpenSource, however, I would like to clear the confusion some people might have.
As promised this project will stay opensource and free with CyberPanel and OpenLiteSpeed at the backend. There will be another version in near future (currently in development) which will run LiteSpeed Ent on the backend (not OpenLiteSpeed) but mostly features on both versions will stay same except one will run OpenLiteSpeed and other LiteSpeed Ent.
Apart from that, I try to patch any bugs as soon as they are reported, and I would like to thank everyone for their feedback.
@cyberpersons Is it possible to enable IPv6, looks like openlightspeed has only bound to the V4 interface
Also the IP shown in cyberpanel is wrong as I installed cyberpanel before setting the 121 NAT for the v4 so it shows the nat overload IP of the firewall instead of the servers IP
Also It looks like removing CSF doesn't re-enable firewalld/firewall and you will get an error trying to start it as the service is masked.
@dragon2611 He reads IP from /etc/cyberpanel/machineIP, you can update the correct IP there.
About firewalld, I will check.
it looks great.
Can provide Bengali translation if you want
@Tumbleguy1 you can use this file to start translation https://github.com/usmannasir/cyberpanel/blob/v1.7.2-vmm/locale/tr/LC_MESSAGES/django.po
Later create pull req or send translated file directly via ticket.
What about binding the IPv6, I did try setting it in the openlightspeed webUI but it didn't seem to do it.
Kudos to your effort, people want stability and it's a no 1 priority.
@dragon2611 How are you doing it, and do you see any errors in OpenLIteSpeed logs? Maybe this can help https://forums.cyberpanel.net/discussion/126/tutorial-how-to-add-2nd-ip-for-websites
@adroitssd
You are right, which is why Virtual Machine Manager and Docker feature are being developed in a separate branch.