[ikk157]

Thank you for contributing to the discussion and providing the links below @sohamb03.  The one below referring to Serghey Rodin is particularly informative:

Correct.  I picked up on that too at the VestaCP Forum discussion.  Also that it was dpeca who was maintaining the updates at the original VestaCP up to September.  His main objective for moving outside was because he was worried about the security of the project because he has instances installed on 120 different servers.  He probably wanted greater control.  And maybe that's a good sign for users of the Debian fork.  He has a vested interest in keeping the fork alive.

I saw the issues too, but then when discussions stopped on those issues I thought they had been solved.  I guess with the forks there were no longer a need for the discussions.  Also, I picked up in the VestaCp Forum that some of the discussions have been deleted at VestaCP Forum.  These must have been the discussions referred to, and also resulting in conflicts with the VestaCP Forum staff, the development of forks and creation of HestiaCP.

Thank you for this valuable feedback.  I picked up in the VestaForum discussions that that is the reason for other users to stick with VestaCP too because of their subscription with the File Manager.  It seems to be working very well.  If I may ask, what extra features does one get with the File Manager?  Can one edit codes, zip and unzip folders?  Like with cPanel File Manager?

Sadly, that is true about the VestaCP Ubuntu saga and also possibly the reason for losing interest as well, as many of the users were waiting for an Ubuntu version of the original VestaCP that got promised to them all of the time, and never materialized in the end.  Nice to hear your explanation about why it hasn't been working so far, and possibly never will unless someone has lots and lots of time and complete access to the core of the original project to make a version that works with Ubuntu.  Dpeca had a good point however about focusing only on one configuration as it's too much of a problem for security codes to maintain more than one configuration at a time.  He probably knew well as he was the last one to work on the security updates for the original VestaCP.

In one of the discussions that you linked to your response, I found these words that echo my main reason for sticking with VestaCP, which is Nginx and it being a super light panel.  He said it very eloquently:


@ikk157 Thank you for your suggestion about CyberPanel.  I don't think I'm in total agreement that VestaCP forks are going to die soon.  Problem is VestaCP is really popular as a free cPanel alternative.  Particularly with how light it is with Nginx.  It's only lacking feature has been security coding and looks as though these are getting updated in the forks, and also with the new HestiaCP that some of the original VestaCP staff who left VestaCP are in process of developing.  Although when I studied all of the discussions looks like HestiaCP no longer is connected with the core of the original VestaCP and has become a panel with its own ID.  May be interesting to see how well it works.  For now I'm checking their discussion Forum first to see what the support requests are and the feedback is like.

VestaCP (and its forks) is actually missing a lot of stuff.

The most obvious is a file manager... they actually charge you for that! (Unless the forks dont). It’s insanely convenient having a web file manager as it’s a hell of a lot faster than ftp. Sure you can use ssh for that, but it’s not as convenient.

Next up CyberPanel has a built in docker manager... which VestaCP does not have at all. This one really depends on whether you use docker or not (I do, but mostly in the command line).

Furthermore, CyberPanel has excellent mobile-compatibility.... while VestaCP is almost unusable on mobile due to elements hiding under others making them impossible to click. (I know this isn’t a big deal because you’re always on desktop).

Moreover, it uses OpenLiteSpeed as its web server, which is hella light. VestaCP uses both nginx and apache, which is very unnecessary and adds a lot of bloat.

And the list goes on.

I really suggest giving it a try, i’ll make you an account to try it out and I’ll be DMing you the details shortly. Trust me, it’s worth having a look at.