Bill Goodall's picture

Hi can you please advise if you are planning on offering a Suite CRM ready appliance that does not require upgrading from Sugar CRM?

Jeremy Davis's picture

TBH I didn't even know SuiteCRM even existed until just now... So up until about 2 minutes ago that would be a 'no'...! :)

Judging from your post and a quick browse of the SuiteCRM website, it is a fork and/or addon of/to SugarCRM. From their website I must admit that I would really like to see it as a standalone appliance (the open source version of SugarCRM works ok, but it is a little like crippleware with reduced features).

Depending on how close it is to SugarCRM we may be able to add it quite easily and I might investigate that. However, at this point we are much more focused on updating the current appliances before we start considering adding new ones...

If you'd like to look into developing it and you can get it working and polished prior to the v14.0 release then we can add it.... I am more than happy to help you if you are keen but unsure. If you want to do that and don't get a timely response here please email me direct jeremy AT

Jeremy Davis's picture

I couldn't help myself and I had a quick look. The current appliance build code for SugarCRM builds the latest SugarCRM. So I tweaked it a bit to build SuiteCRM instead. You can find the updated build code in my GitHub account if you want to build an ISO! :)

Jeremy Davis's picture

I possibly should have posted back previously; the appliance has been released so you no longer need to build the ISO yourself (although you could if you wanted)...
Sean's picture

Can we update to a later version of suite crm.  The one you have posted has a few bugs that have been resolved in the next release.  It also appears that the version listed on here is 3 versions behind.

Jeremy Davis's picture

It's good to confirm that newer versions have resolved this issue. We will definitely update it for the next release (v14.2). I have updated the bug tracking this issue.

The version is a little old because this was one of the first appliances updated for our v14.1 release (it was updated to the latest version back in January). But we didn't release v14.1 until April so it may have already not been the latest version on release. And obviously it's now been a few months since then...

We have a few features that we've been working on which need to be finalised, then we'll start the v14.2 development (which will probably take a few months).

Jeremy Davis's picture

We've update the build code but have yet to rebuild it.

TBH we have a bit of a dilemma which we've somewhat been avoiding, but really need to resolve. Currently our buildchain and infrastructure don't support individual appliance updates between releases. Also each full release takes a lot of time and energy.

I'm currently looking into how we can resolve this in the best way possible. We need to make sure that we properly support things like TKLBAM and the Hub.

My current thought is to perhaps bake in the support for "out of band" individual appliance updates into the v14.2 release (buildchain and infrastructure). And then try to get that out ASAP. Then we can go back and update individual appliances one-by-one (or probably in batches of 5-10). It will actually make the process more labour intensive and therefore expensive, but I think it's probably the best way forward.

Jeremy Davis's picture

Either I got sidetracked, or possibly completely missed your point about the permissions. Either way, unfortunately it wasn't noted on our issue tracker so it was missed for the latest build. :(

I've just added it so it won't get missed for the next release (v15.0).

As noted there, in the future, it'd be nice to provide an easy way to relax, then re-tighten permissions so as to provide easy UI updates, but still support maximum security. Currently it's an either/or scenario (unless you manually relax them, then manually retighten as per the issue notes).

Although actually, looking at the default permissions, it should support adding modules ok already?! Have you by any chance uploaded any files via SFTP or done any other stuff via commandline that may have changed the default permissions?

Jeremy Davis's picture

Have a look here. I've documented how to relax the permissions and then retighten them.

Actually there was a line missing in my "retighten" instructions so I'm really glad you asked! :)

Add new comment