no-subscription repo is not recommended for production use
- Thread starter GhostUser
- Start date
Yes, that is possible but not recommended...
First, this "nag" popup is part of the Proxmox finance model paying the staff...so don't expect help here hacking the code so you don't have to pay for a subscription.
Second, scripts that do exactly this (you find multiple on github if you google for it) alter PVEs code which might break stuff when upgrading Proxmox products. This already happened in the past...
Third, the Proxmox staff doesn't like to help if you ask for help when they see in your logs that you removed that nag popup.
Forth, for homeservers there is the way cheaper "Community subscription" which is the official way to get rid of that popup if it nags you too much...also comes with other benefits like not being a beta tester for paying customers, so less problems and more stability...
First, this "nag" popup is part of the Proxmox finance model paying the staff...so don't expect help here hacking the code so you don't have to pay for a subscription.
Second, scripts that do exactly this (you find multiple on github if you google for it) alter PVEs code which might break stuff when upgrading Proxmox products. This already happened in the past...
Third, the Proxmox staff doesn't like to help if you ask for help when they see in your logs that you removed that nag popup.
Forth, for homeservers there is the way cheaper "Community subscription" which is the official way to get rid of that popup if it nags you too much...also comes with other benefits like not being a beta tester for paying customers, so less problems and more stability...
Last edited:
I found this post randomly Google searching for top-most methods that one is hitting when searching different keywords...
There's a lot out there. I was a bit surprised how no one at Proxmox is concerned about their non-paying user base (i.e. users which will anyhow not buy a subscription).
Because these are exactly the people that DO contribute back... if they cannot pay, involuntarily. They still contribute if they manage to patch their installs - by testing the "no-subscription" repo.
Except they bring in these additional issues to the forum (which no one benefits from) after the things break.
I love how ambiguous this sounds. For one, it's not really in the logs, it's more like towards the end of troubleshooting you discover this was all a botched patch. That alone is frustrating for anyone, not just staff. Then, fixing such issue did not really help fix any real bugs.
I would be very surprised if staff was not willing to help because someone customised their code in this manner - that would be very ambivalent for a company licensing their product under AGPL.
This! I liked how obvious it is not just to myself. So now the question remains ... why not simply call the repo "beta" ... that alone would bring in subscriptions, not red colours.
There's a lot out there. I was a bit surprised how no one at Proxmox is concerned about their non-paying user base (i.e. users which will anyhow not buy a subscription).
Because these are exactly the people that DO contribute back... if they cannot pay, involuntarily. They still contribute if they manage to patch their installs - by testing the "no-subscription" repo.
Except they bring in these additional issues to the forum (which no one benefits from) after the things break.
I love how ambiguous this sounds. For one, it's not really in the logs, it's more like towards the end of troubleshooting you discover this was all a botched patch. That alone is frustrating for anyone, not just staff. Then, fixing such issue did not really help fix any real bugs.
I would be very surprised if staff was not willing to help because someone customised their code in this manner - that would be very ambivalent for a company licensing their product under AGPL.
This! I liked how obvious it is not just to myself. So now the question remains ... why not simply call the repo "beta" ... that alone would bring in subscriptions, not red colours.
I've seen staff helping no-subscription users and that patch wrote something like "Nag-patch applied" to the syslog when starting the server and that staff member wasn't amused to see this when reading through the logs to help that user with his problem...
I wonder what was nagging them about it - it's a good coding habit to log whatever is being done, especially if it's an add-on ...
I still hope the annoyance is with troubleshooting unknown codebase, not that someone customised the UI per se.
The proper way to remove the "nag" is to pay for a subscription. I don't say removing it is as bad as pirating software. It's open source and you are allowed to patch the code according to licensing. But it's still not nice because you are compromising the financial model to not have to pay for it.
If someone asks me for official support because a software isn't running properly and I see in the logs that the software was cracked (so not paying for software of the company that pays my salary), I would also be pissed.
I have a confession to make, I had a reason I looked for all these older threads relating to this topic. I wanted not to be making fuss about something that no one else cares about. Apparently, more people had this discussion prior to me.
I do not want to pretend I do not understand where you are coming from, but I do not share this for these reasons:
- It's entirely up to Proxmox to decide their license - there's benefits and drawbacks and the benefit is e.g. getting back (modified code)
- If you were selling licenses (to access enterprise repo) to a third party with patched UI, that's fraud, if they do not have it. Customising UI is not, for yourself or even others.
- If asking for support on a patched product when condition of that support was that you run that product without modifications, that's annoying. But either you have access to the enterprise repo or you do not. A popup does not change that.
Last edited: