 |
Open Sourcing the Rest of App Server
Posted by driscoll on July 15, 2005 at 12:07 PM | Comments (9)
As you know, we've open sourced Sun's AS PE (as Project GlassFish). Recently, some people have taken us to task on not doing the rest of it too. Leaving aside the "geez, are we ever going to not get flack" factor, I thought I'd post this...
In a recent article in Developer Pipeline, my boss got asked about opening the rest of it:
CRN: Will all editions of the application server be available under the CDDL? The version currently available is the platform edition.
SCHWARTZ: If Johnny has his druthers, yes. There's no reason for us to hold anything back. Open source doesn't mean free, as in no revenue.
Now, if you read closely, he didn't say yes. So don't go getting worked up over this. But here's the thing about my boss: Read his blog. Now, imagine this: he means everything he says. Sun is committed to Open Source.
Bookmark blog post:  del.icio.us  Digg  DZone  Furl  Reddit
Comments
Comments are listed in date ascending order (oldest first) | Post Comment
-
Well, that will just be the icing on the cake when Johnny gets his way, won't it?
As Johnny says, noone wants to run unsupported software, so even with a free Open Source version of JAS EE, most folks won't care.
But it will be nice for those that do use it to be able to potentially tear open the server when Things Get Stupid so that you can work around them if necessary, or potentially even fix them.
The real key there, though, is to make the source distribution accurate to the actual binary, licensed distribution. If I can't go "ant dist" at the top level and be assured that I got the same server as I did when I did pkg-add jasee90, then that part of the OSS equation has little value, as it's not obivious that you're running the same thing.
But I've always appreciated the free PE version of JAS simply because I thought it made sense for the small departmental applications where support is less necessary, and VAR and ISVs have lots of potential for customers. Having a free, deployable, and supportable app server is a big win there.
Posted by: whartung on July 15, 2005 at 04:21 PM
-
Whartung confusingly said: "As Johnny says, noone wants to run unsupported software, so even with a free Open Source version of JAS EE, most folks won't care."
Where'd you read that it wouldn't be supported?
Whartung also astutely said: "If I can't go "ant dist" at the top level and be assured that I got the same server..."
Indeed, I'd agree with that. Although the people complaining that PE doesn't have clustering would probably not agree with the two of us.
Posted by: driscoll on July 17, 2005 at 12:10 AM
-
Funny though that Sun is making so much noises about open-sourcing the PE application server. To me it looks like that the PE reached the end of its life-cycle as product (most of the code is already available in the RI). So why not using it as a marketing stand and announcing it to be open-sourced. What a disservice to all the real open-source developers because the open-source movement is now seen as a dumpster for end-of-life projects. Again, I do not see much value in Glassfish because it is not in the same league as JBoss and I, as an open-source developer, would not work on a project where its extended version (EE) is still closed-source.
Sun spawned some great open-source projects like Tomcat or open-sources some great products like OpenOffice but this move was not well thought out and executed and that is why, I think, Sun gets flaked.
Posted by: schaefa on July 18, 2005 at 01:04 PM
-
schaefa wrote: To me it looks like that the PE reached the end of its life-cycle as product (most of the code is already available in the RI).
Really? EOL'd? Wow, I'd better go tell those 100 engineers to stop typing.
"Stop coding everyone! schaefa says we've been EOL'd!" snicker
We're not EOL'ing the product. This is the next stage on our journey, and only one stop along the way. As I just mentioned in the blog above.
PE (and the RI) are still under active development, including all the nifty stuff that's going into Java EE 5. Also, PE is fully usable in deployment, and has been for years. Open Sourcing is one great way to let people know that.
JBoss has some features that we don't have in PE (like clustering, though I hear anecdotally that has some issues in JBoss). PE has some stuff that JBoss doesn't have - like real, published performance numbers from Spec.
Also, as one of the guys that's been working with Tomcat for the last five years, I'd like to say I'm a bit miffed at being told I'm not "real open source". I'm sure that the other six guys who are Apache committers that work for me will be a bit miffed too, just as soon as they stop coding on an EOL'd product and read my blog.
Lastly, the EE stuff that you're complaining about us not giving up also contains stuff that no Open Source project currently has, like really fancy persistent failover. Unfortunately, there are some third party code bits in there that would need sorting out before we could do anything about changing that license. Patience. Things are happening.
Posted by: driscoll on July 18, 2005 at 02:35 PM
-
Hi Jim - I know you wanted to leave the "geez, are we ever going to not get flack" aside, but all of this is an interesting case study of where meritocracy doesn't apply in community.
Maybe there should be a "Complainer" role that people can request, like "Commiter" and it gets granted based on merit, like we do for Commiters! Image if you had to earn the right to complain, like you do to commit code...Ahhh, don't wake me from this dream.
Posted by: jbob on July 19, 2005 at 07:52 AM
-
jbob,
Yes conversations take a long time, and they can be frustrating, but in reality they are the only way to really get to know people.
So, in fact, they could be worthwhile, even with the complaining.
Posted by: chris_mahan on July 19, 2005 at 08:17 AM
-
Chis wrote: So, in fact, they could be worthwhile, even with the complaining.
I'm fine with the complaining actually - if they say it here, and it's wrong, I get to correct it (like us EOL'ing my product, sheesh). I'd rather that than have folks confidently tell their friends the same wrong information.
Posted by: driscoll on July 19, 2005 at 09:58 AM
-
I guess my point about unupported software goes back to the point that MOST companies really don't care about the OSS nature of the project anyway, as long as it's supported. For example, I'm sure many companies were perfectly happy with the free PE, with it being OSS as icing on the cake. When EE goes OSS, the companies will still be paying for the support regardless of the fact that it is OSS. That's more what I meant.
The other thing that doesn't come up and that I think folks are missing is that there is movement, particularly in the public sector, notably in emerging markets, towards requirements for the systems to be OSS. Sun PE and eventually EE will be able to be sold into such markets.
Finally, there's this impression that JEE servers are only for monster "enterprise" systems, when in fact many small to medium applications can leverage and enjoy the services that a JEE server can provide. On todays systems the overhead of a JEE server is pretty minor all things considered.
Posted by: whartung on July 19, 2005 at 01:36 PM
-
whartung wrote: I guess my point about unupported software goes back to the point that MOST companies really don't care about the OSS nature of the project anyway, as long as it's supported. For example, I'm sure many companies were perfectly happy with the free PE, with it being OSS as icing on the cake.
I used to beleive that too, but increasingly I wonder. You get some stuff with an Open license over and above the "free" pricepoint. One example is free code escrow. There are others. Prehaps fodder for a future blog :-)
Posted by: driscoll on July 20, 2005 at 04:59 PM
|
java.net RSS Feeds
