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.
Experiences with spanel
Hi
Does anyone have servers in production with Spanel (https://www.spanel.io/)? If so, what has been your experience compared to Cpanel?
Comments
@MikeA is running some trial plans on SPanel since a while ago. He might be able to tell from his experience as a host.
works so far
wow thanks for the mention.
if this is really stable, i can move from cyberpanel to this.
But you're aware that beta period may end anytime soon and you will need to pay $14.95 monthly for Lite license, right? Oops.
oops....i thought its free upto 10 accounts
When was SPanel last updated? Is it being actively developed?
I note that the System Requirements
https://www.spanel.io/docs/article/getting-started/system-requirements/
Only supports Rocky Linux 8. Or does this mean any RHEL 8/CentOS 8 derivatives?
It's actively developed but they only focus on client-side improvements as a priority. The backup feature is being reworked completely and released soon if I remember correctly, as well as one or two other client facing features.
They only "support" Rocky 8. They probably won't notice if it's some other 8.
Been using Mike's Spanel Promo and it is working well 👌
It looks interesting. But just don't see it mentioned a lot, makes me wonder how much is being actively developed. Would be nice if they had their own forum and then even better if that forum is active. That can help to show that the project is being actively used and actively maintained.
There's some concern in the statement that they focus on client-side improvements and are reworking the backup - at least some concerns for me.
I'm more of a fan of a control panel being a tool that individual server administrators can wield and use as they see fit. Having functions and features that are shaped down to the lowest common denominator has more value for me because then I can build on that in whatever ways I want.
For example with backups, on cPanel servers the
/scripts/pkgacctscript together with it's--skiphomediroption makes backing up a cinch./scripts/pkgacct --skiphomedir %user% /backup/dirallows me to back up all of the essentials necessary to recreate the account without the home directory. I can then rsync the/home/%user%directory however I see fit since the home directory is typically going to be the largest part of an account.That backup model might not be for everyone, I'm sure it's not. But by providing the
pkgacctscript with the option to skip the user's home directory, it allows me to create my own backup model.The fear I have with SPanel reworking their backup system is that they are trying to devise a backup model that everyone will use. Instead of providing the tools for administrators to devise their own model, it's a one click option that everyone uses.
The smaller and more specific you make each tool the less dependent server administrators are on the project's developers to release features - which often takes a lot of time. A feature request has to be made, it has to be picked up by developers, and it has to be released by those developers. If a server administrator can perform that task themselves with the provided tools then there's no need to depend on the developers to provide that functionality.
Everyone may have their own backup strategy - where they send their backups, how they replicate those backups, etc. But that's all beyond the scope that I believe a control panel should be providing. Give me a
/scripts/pkgacct --skiphomedirlike tool and I'll formulate where I want those backups to be sent and managed.At least that's my opinion.
dito.