I posted this at the SF discussion forum. Unsure if that place is even read anymore, I am also posting here.
One of the primary reason’s I am attracted to Webmin and Virtualmin is for it’s built-in backup tools. They are simple, configurable, have a nice UI, and they work well. Sometimes however it makes little sense to install Webmin just for the backup feature.
So… why not make a new separate project, called (of course) “Backupmin”?
The project’s primary focus would be backup administration. For an MVP, just copy the backup functions from Webmin and put them into Backupmin as is. Future goals can include adding in incremental, retention, and restoration options similar to what Virtualmin provides for virtual servers. Perhaps once Backupmin is mature enough, you can consider deprecating Webmin and Virtualmin’s backup features in favor of Backupmin.
It’s highly unlikely a project like this would be started, at least in the manner you described.
Webmin is the core of all projects including Virtualmin and Cloudmin
The “min” team is already pretty tied up operating the current projects
Don’t see this as my way of trying to knock you down, if you can get a team of folks together to get the ball rolling, who knows… Anything could be possible. But as you said, the current “min” products already have pretty good backup functionality, so I guess the final question would be “why reinvent the wheel?”
The only thing that comes to mind is that if you’re backing up a Webmin/Virtualmin site it wouldn’t make any sense to have it as a separate entity.
Unless, of course, you made it compatible with all panels. For instance Backup min would be able to back up a Cpanel site (and others) and then convert it to a Webmin/Virtualmin server.
Now THAT would be a hot item I think, but I shudder to think what it would take to actually do that. I’m not even sure it would be legal.
That part I already knew as I used that feature. It’s one of the main reasons I picked Virtualmin as I had never migrated a server before. It worked like a charm.
I perhaps went too far and maybe caused some confusion by mentioning Virtualmin in this feature request. The backup function I am referring to is the plain vanilla Filesystem backup module in Webmin itself. I agree that maybe having Virtualmin’s site backup feature as a separate entity wouldn’t make much sense (initially).
I do think there is a benefit to having Webmin’s Filesystem backup module as a separate entity. It would compete with things like BackupPC. Of course you are probably wondering why not use that instead… and my response is that BackupPC is a pain to not only install/setup, but also painful to manage.
Yes, they are great. Maybe it’s just me being a minimalist, but I think it’s overkill to have a full Webmin instance running to only use it for configuring backups.
It’s okay, I don’t expect someone to start building this any time soon. I figured I would share the idea to get feedback, and in case anyone else was thinking about the same thing.
I agree it takes some time to setup, but manage?
Mine has been running for years now with no issues
Used the restore function a few times also and it works quite well compared to a few other solutions.
Virtualmins backup function is one of the few things I am not that fond of TBH, as it seems quite fragile and has always stopped doing the backups for one reason or another.
