Discussions

News: eXo platform 1.0 updated

  1. eXo platform 1.0 updated (19 messages)

    The new eXo platform version is now available with many new features:

    *WSRP support :
    -Access portlets hosted on another server through Web Services
    -Make your JSR 168 compatible portlets accessible from non Java portals

    *Support for Java Server Faces 1.0 (Portal and portlets)
    -implementation of a big set of re-usable UI components
    -Have a look to the car demo embded in a portlet...

    *EAR archive available
    -tested on JBoss and websphere
    -Jetty and Tomcat 5 integrated application available too

    *Enhanced layout and styles:
    -Support for row layouts
    -new renderers and styles for portal components
    -real time customizer portlet

    *Huge optimizations and performance gains

    *New languages suppported (French, Chinese, Vietnamese, Russian, Ukrainian, Norwegian, Slovak and Czech)

    *Group page support :
    -include mandatory group pages in user pages
    -admin customizer portlet

    *New services :
    -XML processing and querying service
    -Forum portlet and service
    -Chart service

    *Cocoon bridge :
    -embed your existing Cocoon applications
    -3rd bridge after Struts and JSF

    *Maven port
     
    New documentation site : http://exo.sourceforge.net
    (as we did not write any article this time :) )

    And as usual:
    www.exoplatform.org
    www.exoplatform.com

    Threaded Messages (19)

  2. version 1.0 beta 5[ Go to top ]

    Just to say it is version 1.0 beta 5

    It is not final yet...
  3. version 1.0 beta 5[ Go to top ]

    1.0 and you're still changing the architecture ?!

    I really like what you're doing, but when will exo be stable for using it within big banking applications ?

    I see you changing architecture, code, downloads and webpages quite often ?
    I even saw your webpages offline for some time.

    How many developers are developing for exo at the moment ?
    Is that only you ?
    How is standing behind exo ?

    Thanx
    Oliver
  4. version 1.0 beta 5[ Go to top ]

    Let me answer point by point :

    "1.0 and you're still changing the architecture ?!"

    What do you mean? We have not changed the architecture we have just added new services.

    "I really like what you're doing, but when will exo be stable for using it within big banking applications ?"

    Thanks for the first part of the sentence :). The portlet container is already very stable and even some portal companies are about to use it to provide JSR 168 technology to their customers. The portal should also be ready very soon. Some big companies have already started projects on eXo even if it is still beta.

    "I see you changing architecture, code, downloads and webpages quite often ?"

    Yes, our team is very active (more than 6000 commits between beta 4 and 5). We also release quite often to get as much feedbacks as possible and the Java community is helping a lot.

    So this is definetely a good sign to see many changes...

    "I even saw your webpages offline for some time. "

    Yes, we changed our hosting service.

    "How many developers are developing for exo at the moment ? "

    There are about 7 full time developers and many part time committers. Companies that have started projects on eXo platform as the application framework for their future software have also provided some great extensions and patches.

    Our business model has also attracted many independent developers.

    "Is that only you ?"

    So it is not only me, I just try to manage the project the best than I can but due to our service architecture this is quite easy! Tuan Nguyen is also leading the project with me and he does a wonderfull job.

    "How is standing behind exo ?"

    There is the eXo platform SARL company behind the eXo platform project.
  5. version 1.0 beta 5[ Go to top ]

    Thanks for your answer !

    Some of my developers told me about being unable making the Struts examples working - from beta 4 to 5?

    Oliver
    P.S. We are a large retail bank in Cologne and examining exo for intranet/internet uses. Some large projects need a decision quite soon.
  6. version 1.0 beta 5[ Go to top ]

    The Struts example should work but we will have another look. Thanks for the feedbacks.

    Feel free to contact us to ask any questions / sugestions, we are quite reactive.

    Benjamin
  7. congrats guys[ Go to top ]

    congrats guys.
    keep up the good work.

    Regards,
    Tom Baeyens
    Founder jBpm.org
  8. Book about portals[ Go to top ]

    For those who like printed books here is a link :

    http://www.booksmatter.com/book.aspx?isbn=0471469513&cp=0

    Note that I have not contributed to it or even read it but the table of content is interesting and the Open Source portal used for portlet development is the eXo platform.
  9. LGPL[ Go to top ]

    On the contrary of Liferay or JBossNuke or JetSpeed Exo has only GPL license !?
  10. LGPL[ Go to top ]

    All our business model is based on the GPL license. That is why we can provide a commercial license of the same code and have so many people and companies that contribute as we redistribute the profit of the license sells to the contributors, according to their amount of work.

    Indeed this is a new model, but it works and works well. That is why eXo platform is leading the innovation in that space even if the project is younger than the other actors of the market.

    BTW, JBossNukes is also GPL if I am not wrong (because they did a port of a GPL project). Jetspeed is Apache and Liferay is MIT license.
  11. LGPL[ Go to top ]

    Hi,

    supposed I'm a big bank serving a lot of people with exo using my own and other portlets - do I have to pay license fees ? How much ?

    If I then even change the exo code for internal uses, what do I have to do then ?

    Thanx
    Oliver
  12. LGPL[ Go to top ]

    supposed I'm a big bank serving a lot of people with exo using my own and other portlets - do I have to pay license fees ?
    If you use the GPL license license for your portlet too then no license fees are required. Using GPL means releasing the code of your application.

    The commercial license also add many warranties on the product, which the GPL does not have.
    If I then even change the exo code for internal uses, what do I have to do then ?
    Just use GPL for it and open the code so that the community can benefit from it like you benefit from the work of other companies.

    The choice is quite simple in fact, either the companies have to contribute to the project or they have to pay not to contribute back and keep their code close. It is a strategic choice that decision makers have to make.

    Note that if you contribute back you will get the credits (amount of points) associated to your task as any other commiters.

    If you want more information about the license just mail us at : licenses at exoplatform dot com

    Benjamin
  13. LGPL[ Go to top ]

    That is not true Benjamin,

    The GPL allows you to freely use your code for internal use even if you want to keep your modifications or extensions proprietary.

    From the FAQ of the FSF: http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#InternalDistribution

    Is making and using multiple copies within one organization or company "distribution"?
    No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As a consequence, a company or other organization can develop a modified version and install that version through its own facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that modified version to outsiders.
    However, when the organization transfers copies to other organizations or individuals, that is distribution. In particular, providing copies to contractors for use off-site is distribution.

    Otherwise speaking, if you only plan to develop modifications that will stay internal to your bank, you will never be impacted by the viral effect of the GPL. The viral effect only applies to ISV/OEM/VAR that want to repackage and redistribute to third party people and organisations a version (modified or not) of the Exo platform.

    I know Benjamin that this is not what you wanted to do and that is perhaps breaking your current dual licensing business model but that is the GPL...

    Peace
    Stéphane
  14. LGPL[ Go to top ]

    Stéphane,

    It does not break our dual license model at all, the problem comes from the notion of "distribution" which is actually quite ambiguous.

    The sentence : "However, when the organization transfers copies to other organizations or individuals, that is distribution. In particular, providing copies to contractors for use off-site is distribution. " makes it quite difficult to use in practise.

    Take the example of a consultant from another company that comes to the bank. If it installs the code on its laptop this is seen as distribution and if the code itself is not under the GPL license then it breaks the original license.

    Take the other example where the company is a multinational firm with many national companies. What you think as an internal distribution can also be seen as an external one according to the lawyer you are talking too.

    All our business model has been validated by a free software and intellectual property expert lawyer that have strong connections with the French Free Software Fundation.

    Therefore, the two solutions to either release the code itself as GPL - even for internal use - or purchase a commercial license are in fact the two only viable solutions to avoid any risks regarding license conflicts.

    Benjamin
  15. Re: scope of the GPL[ Go to top ]

    Hi again Ben,

    1) This does not make sense for a company to fork the core kernel of Exo. For maintenance reasons, it will be better in all the cases for them to contribute their bug fixes or other core kernel modifications to the community.

    2) If they want to develop extensions (a portlet for example), do we have to consider it as a single work or only as a mere aggregation? IMHO, as the Portlet API is a standard in order to develop portable reusable multi-vendor portlets, there is no viral effect. Moreover J2EE itself is not open source and then certainly not compliant with the GPL but that is another story...
    Moreover, the integrator may use a NDA:

    Does the GPL allow me to develop a modified version under a nondisclosure agreement?
    Yes. For instance, you can accept a contract to develop changes and agree not to release your changes until the client says ok. This is permitted because in this case no GPL-covered code is being distributed under an NDA.
    You can also release your changes to the client under the GPL, but agree not to release them to anyone else unless the client says ok. In this case, too, no GPL-covered code is being distributed under an NDA, or under any additional restrictions. The GPL would give the client the right to redistribute your version. In this scenario, the client will probably choose not to exercise that right, but does have the right.

    3) Size of the company. The GPL does not mention anything regarding the size of the "internal organisation". The scope of the GPL is the same for a 10 employees company or for a 100'000 one.

    4) Even if you try to enforce a very strong viral effect in order to maximize your commercial license sales, you will face certain issues. In fact exactly the same than MySQL right now. Most of the other OSI licenses are not compliant with the GPL (http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html) including the Apache ones (and I am sure you bundle some Apache libraries, are you?). So you will have to begin creating and maintaing some lists of exceptions such as: http://www.mysql.com/products/foss-exception.html
    Moreover regarding your definition of mere aggregation (scope of the viral effect), you will also face the same issue than MySQL (= distributors such as RedHat do not want any more to package it because this may infect other programs on their Cd-Roms). This becomes to be quite complex (did I say a nightmare!) from a legal point of view...

    Finally the core spirit of the GPL is to let the end-users (or the company) freely use and modify the program. You may "tax" ISV, OEM, VAR etc... but this is quite difficult to implement in practice (what about free trial distributions, etc... so for example MySQL plans now to launch a new specific VAR program). And all this business model is tightly linked with the notion of "single work" without really any legal case studies to determine what is a single work or not. So your business model is quite the same as ours (http://www.collaborativesource.org), but we preferred transparently saying to our customers the exact scope of the license rather than letting planning some viral effect doubts in order to resell commercial versions.

    My 2 cts
    Stéphane
  16. Re: scope of the GPL[ Go to top ]

    Stéphane
    1) This does not make sense for a company to fork the core kernel of Exo. For maintenance reasons, it will be better in all the cases for them to contribute their bug fixes or other core kernel modifications to the community.
    I completely agree with you and this is what most of the companies that use eXo platform do ( I am sure I don't know many of them as we don't control the downloads). In conterpart we grant them with an amount of credits that is used as a vote power in our consortium as well as an equity way to redistribute licenses sells profits.
    2) If they want to develop extensions (a portlet for example), do we have to consider it as a single work or only as a mere aggregation? IMHO, as the Portlet API is a standard in order to develop portable reusable multi-vendor portlets, there is no viral effect.
    Totally agree again and I stated that here or in a previous TSS thread. If the portlet itself does not use any of the eXo platform extensions like the bridges or services then the license used for the compliant portlet has not to be GPL.
    Moreover J2EE itself is not open source and then certainly not compliant with the GPL but that is another story...
    In fact it is for some versions of the JCP, and the portlet API is part of it. Anyway you are right, this is another story.
    Moreover, the integrator may use a NDA:

    Does the GPL allow me to develop a modified version under a nondisclosure agreement?Yes.

    For instance, you can accept a contract to develop changes and agree not to release your changes until the client says ok. This is permitted because in this case no GPL-covered code is being distributed under an NDA. You can also release your changes to the client under the GPL, but agree not to release them to anyone else unless the client says ok. In this case, too, no GPL-covered code is being distributed under an NDA, or under any additional restrictions. The GPL would give the client the right to redistribute your version. In this scenario, the client will probably choose not to exercise that right, but does have the right.
    Yes and this is what we do with some code used by governements and where security issues are involved. But this implied a direct relashionship between the eXo platform SARL and the customer.

    The code produced by the integrator for the customer has not to be published only during the NDA period. After the code has been released to the client then the license is GPL and if the customer wants to distribute it internaly then we face the same risks than before. Again, risks that can simply be avoided by either publishing the source or purchasing a commercial license.

    Note that we have actually integrators that use the GPL license and some that also went to the commercial license (OEM one and end user one). But here this involves a commercial contract between the eXo platform SARL and the integrators which allows the integrator to use another license than GPL, if they need one.
    3) Size of the company. The GPL does not mention anything regarding the size of the "internal organisation". The scope of the GPL is the same for a 10 employees company or for a 100'000 one.
    The size of the company is not important you are right (and I never said it was) but the way the multinational company is managed legaly (several national "subcompanies") implies as stated before.
    4) Even if you try to enforce a very strong viral effect in order to maximize your commercial license sales, you will face certain issues.
    Just note that the main goal of our use the GPL is not to "maximize your commercial license sales" as we mainly are a service company but to (1) protect our Intellectual Property and our technological advantage in an very competitive market and (2) leverage the community and collaboration work to produce a nice product.

    The real winner here is the final user. Just look at the eXo platform development this last year and you will understand how this model (with the add of credit points) is efficient.
    In fact exactly the same than MySQL right now. Most of the other OSI licenses are not compliant with the GPL (http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html) including the Apache ones (and I am sure you bundle some Apache libraries, are you?). So you will have to begin creating and maintaing some lists of exceptions such as: http://www.mysql.com/products/foss-exception.html
    As you stated it does cause practical problems (eXo platform internal problems btw) but no legal issues. In fact we can legally use Apache/BSD projects with the GNU/GPL license but the other way is not possible.

    Here is some more information from the FSF site :

    The Apache License, Version 1.1.
    This is a permissive non-copyleft free software license with a few requirements that render it incompatible with the GNU GPL.
    We urge you not to use the Apache licenses for software you write. However, there is no reason to avoid running programs that have been released under this license, such as Apache.
    Moreover regarding your definition of mere aggregation (scope of the viral effect), you will also face the same issue than MySQL (= distributors such as RedHat do not want any more to package it because this may infect other programs on their Cd-Roms). This becomes to be quite complex (did I say a nightmare!) from a legal point of view...
    I think it is only true for the non GPL version ditributed by Red Hat. Othewise I would not understand why a GPL license product shiped in another GPL product would be a problem.
    Finally the core spirit of the GPL is to let the end-users (or the company) freely use and modify the program. You may "tax" ISV, OEM, VAR etc... but this is quite difficult to implement in practice (what about free trial distributions, etc... so for example MySQL plans now to launch a new specific VAR program). And all this business model is tightly linked with the notion of "single work" without really any legal case studies to determine what is a single work or not.
    This is your interpretation of the GPL, our is different : we consider that the GPL allows any user to contribute to make a better product in its own way (either code contribution or license purchase, the result is the same).

    Note that some companies are using eXo platform SARL bundled with their free trial CD-ROM. That was not a practical problem at all, it is just usual business.

    In practise, if you take the binary choice as use GPL or purchase commercial license then it is very efficient and simple. Don't create problem where there are not, many successful projects used in companies are based on the GPL license (maybe you have heard about Linux :) )
    So your business model is quite the same as ours (http://www.collaborativesource.org), but we preferred transparently saying to our customers the exact scope of the license rather than letting planning some viral effect doubts in order to resell commercial versions.
    Yes the business model is the same but your license is not OSI certified which makes it unusable by some governements (as they use the OSI list for Open Source definition).

    Benjamin
  17. LGPL[ Go to top ]

    Very interesting, I don't know about this. What if my organization has thoudsands of user or installation. So I am allolwed to redistribute the modified code within my organization :-) ????
  18. Documentation[ Go to top ]

    Hi,

    in context of a portalserver comparison I am looking for a detailed eXo documentation. Where can I find it ?

    THX
    Oliver Pfau
  19. Documentation[ Go to top ]

    The documentation site can be found at : http://exo.sourceforge.net

    If you have any other questions just join our mailing list or post a message in our forum:

    http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=62218
    &
    http://exo.sourceforge.net/forum

    Benjamin
  20. exo.services.ServicesManager[ Go to top ]

    Hi,

    I intend to use eXo platform Eclipse plugin for BPEL business processes manager - BPELPower (http://bpel.laits.gmu.edu/bpel/admin/index.jsp). I built a project using the example. When deploying project, I got error message.

    2004-10-01 15:46:07 StandardContext[/portlet]Exception sending context destroyed event to listener instance of class exo.services.portletcontainer.impl.servlet.PortletApplicationListener
    java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: exo/services/ServicesManager
    at exo.services.portletcontainer.impl.servlet.PortletApplicationListener.contextDestroyed(PortletApplicationListener.java:110)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.listenerStop(StandardContext.java:3868)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.stop(StandardContext.java:4531)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.start(StandardContext.java:4371)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.addChildInternal(ContainerBase.java:823)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.addChild(ContainerBase.java:807)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHost.addChild(StandardHost.java:595)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHostDeployer.install(StandardHostDeployer.java:277)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHost.install(StandardHost.java:832)
    at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.deployDirectories(HostConfig.java:701)
    at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.deployApps(HostConfig.java:432)
    at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.check(HostConfig.java:1083)
    at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.lifecycleEvent(HostConfig.java:327)
    at org.apache.catalina.util.LifecycleSupport.fireLifecycleEvent(LifecycleSupport.java:119)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHost.backgroundProcess(StandardHost.java:800)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase$ContainerBackgroundProcessor.processChildren(ContainerBase.java:1619)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase$ContainerBackgroundProcessor.processChildren(ContainerBase.java:1628)
    at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase$ContainerBackgroundProcessor.run(ContainerBase.java:1608)
    at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:536)

    Obviously, system could not find exo/services/ServicesManager. Where can I find this file?

    Thanks in advance.

    Jonas