Unofficial updater script for Proxmox VE (HOST / LXC / VM )
- Thread starter BassT
- Start date
I would argue this lacks rationale, i.e. either lots of users are looking for this and the easiest thing to do then is to provide them with official solution or hardly anyone has this as their priority and then very few are potentially negatively affected (they do not look for this online). The OP did something, got called sarcastic for pointing out the slow progress in-house and now that he even put a disclaimer on top, is asked to call it something so that people will not find it.
I have clear the right things directly with the Proxmox Staff.
They are absolutely confirm with:
So please don't hack on me.
If you don't like my script, its ok, but a lot of other like it.
I eaven don't make the script, to destroy any Server. My opinion was to make the script for me, and let any other try to use it, if they want to.
So please, don't blame on me!
Last edited:
[QUOTE="BassT, post: 617239, member: 172782"
So please, don't blame on me!
[/QUOTE]
I did not wrote that YOUR script is destroying installations, I just warned users generally as exactly this happened a lot when users download something from somewhere without knowing details.
=> Please use third party scripts only if you know exactly what you do.
As we have no quality control about all this, its would be quite annoying if a tool with proxmox in the name creates issues. This will not help the project and my role is to protect the project and the community here.
So please, don't blame on me!
[/QUOTE]
I did not wrote that YOUR script is destroying installations, I just warned users generally as exactly this happened a lot when users download something from somewhere without knowing details.
=> Please use third party scripts only if you know exactly what you do.
As we have no quality control about all this, its would be quite annoying if a tool with proxmox in the name creates issues. This will not help the project and my role is to protect the project and the community here.
The issue here is not what you did; its what others might assume from it.
All modern software, be it Linux, Windows, MacOS, or whatever, is complex and has a ton of interdependencies. Consequently, a central update management facility is NOT trivial as It needs to be constantly updated with all updated packages metadata that is aware of the errata, impacted dependencies, and then manage the up/down states of impacted systems to assure continuity (think, ipam database down while dhcp server is up.)
I think your script is perfectly fine for non production use, where breaking stuff doesnt result in a service outage. The objection is that you make no such disclaimer.
@tom, what would you prefer him to name the tool like? Proxmox is your company name, fair enough, product name is PVE, he would then want to indicate it's a tool for PVE, how else to do it than to include it in the name? If he cannot include it in the name, how will anyone find it e.g. via regular web search? People know it's from github and it's not from Proxmox's github. He has the disclaimer at the top. If you make a tool for e.g. tweaking Samsung SSDs, you will want to make it clear it's good for that product (even it's not yours). Should he call it Updater for Proxmox VE by XYZ? You would then take the exception that it might sound like XYZ is part of Proxmox. You may want to establish some branding guidelines for 3rd party tools, not just ask him to do "something else".
"Proxmox VE" is verbiage they use themselves including in docs: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Main_Pagesounds good, but I don't want to remove the name "Proxmox" completely
And I need a name for the directory
Please @ll give me more nice Ideas
I would probably go with something like "Auto-update for Proxmox VE" as if you go Google search anything relating to updates (and everyone puts in Proxmox, not PVE, you spell out the other products' name if need be, not PVE), it would clash with their own e.g. 7to8 upgrade docs.
From Trademark here:
For example, don't call your new app "Proxmox XY App". Instead consider "XY App for Proxmox Virtual Environment".
- Auto-Update for Proxmox VE
sounds also good
From Trademark here:
For example, don't call your new app "Proxmox XY App". Instead consider "XY App for Proxmox Virtual Environment".
- Auto-Update for Proxmox VE
sounds also good
I thought you had that all sorted out early in the year (in this thread already), then @tom said yesterday:
https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/u...xmox-ve-host-lxc-vm.121733/page-2#post-617197
So I do not understand what more was expected of you. It looks to me like it was a trigger-happy post out of habit, now there's nothing more to nitpick on. Which is okay, but why not simply say that and apologise (for the unintended confusion)? It's almost like you got antagonised for making a tool they could not (find the time for), but knew how to make it better. (Don't talk about it, make it, or do not make it and sort out the branding and don't disregard other people's work if yours is not better or there simply isn't any comparable such at all.) That was completely unnecessary.
sounds good, but I don't want to remove the name "Proxmox" completely
And I need a name for the directory
When you look at other projects, they do not really go as far as you do, for instance when even extending the existing functionality:
https://github.com/isasmendiagus/pmxcfs-ram
The above is a perfect example that with some historical abbreviation which was not something they could/would even get a trademark on (pmx), nobody cares. Ironically, in the same manner, if you were to call your tool
pve-mass-update, it would not violate anything.What you put in your tool's
--help or readme.md, especially if you include a banner clarifying you are not affiliated with Proxmox, your github name does not mislead into thinking you are somehow a Proxmox endorsed repo, is really not subject to any branding rules of someone else in any way. The media-kit is for e.g. partners so that they do not mess up brand identity, but you had been clearly communicated, you are not a partner with your tool, neither is your affiliation sought for.Proxmox as a wordmark is registered (in US and EU) and there's the argument to be made that unless you do anything that misleads anyone while obtaining your tool it is somehow originating from the same origin as the official tools, you have done your part. All the other disclaimers are just being very polite and prudent. Not using Proxmox as a prefix in your tool name is arguable (at this stage, it's a polite request), but nobody wants to type out (not even with shell-completion) command like
proxmox-super-update-my-entire-realm.So my take would be to name it what I want, I would mimic the respective command name structure (prefix
pve, or pvecm), I would then include the disclaimer on top of license information and finally, I would put into my readme whatever I want, in whichever typecase, precisely because you are not affiliated with Proxmox in any way.So you can include any of these that fit, for the SEO, the fact that Google puts your result on top is not violating anyone's trademark, it would be an issue if you were e.g. impersonating someone affiliated with Proxmox and going on to financially benefit from e.g. sales derived from such activity.
And of course your directory can be named Proxmox, if I make a tool that cross-compiles and then put downloads into /windows, /macos, do you really think that would make a valid trademark case for the owner? It's not like you are going to register a domain name called proxmox-update-manager.com, or are you?
Last edited: