Interface21 on Open Source
Rod Johnson in Replies to Nonsense about Open Source says that Interface21 is the only legitimate company that can offer support for Spring.
...at least that's my interpretation...
Ben Speakmon (of SourceLabs) responds with Nonsense about Interface21.
Both articles are good reads. However, I think Ben has a good point:
One final point for Rod: why did you open source Spring at all? If you're so convinced that no one else can offer credible support for it, why not just make it proprietary?
Is Interface21 becoming the JBoss from two years ago? Will they one day make it difficult for companies to provide services around Spring like JBoss has? Fleury and Johnson will say that "professional open source" is the only way to have a truly successful project. While it may be working well for them, I tend to like DHH's stance on Rails a bit more:
I believe a Rails Inc consisting of a large group of core committers would have an unfair advantage in the training and consulting space - easily siphoning off all the best juice and leaving little for anything else. There are plenty of examples in our industry of that happening around open source tools.
It's much more satisfying to see a broader pool of companies all competing on a level playing field.
Disclaimer: In the past, I've provided training and consulting around Spring - in addition to writing a book about it. Interface21 has never done anything to discourage people from using my services. At least they haven't done anything that I know of.
Posted by Dave Johnson on September 21, 2007 at 11:33 AM MDT #
JBoss is one of the big successes. I guess that you can bully people INTO not making a big deal of their support for your project(from which you make money/career). JBoss showed the way for Rod Johnson(internface21).
Just like MySQL says that if you use MYSQL plus jdbc drivers in a commercial setting, you need to pay them license fees, Companies(earlier, Commerical now the Professional OpenSource companies) are trying to use FUD to get people to pay up.
Posted by anjan bacchu on September 21, 2007 at 12:56 PM MDT #
The important point IMO that Ben makes though is that anyone can fix bugs in open source - in their own copy and thats one of the beauties of it - and although its always desirable to get that bug-fix back into the original - its not uncommon that with many open source projects you might be waiting quite a while for an official release - so I imagine these support companies can provide a valuable service to their clients by responding in a more speedy fashion.
Posted by Niall on September 21, 2007 at 01:06 PM MDT #
Posted by Niall on September 21, 2007 at 01:09 PM MDT #
Posted by Anonymous on September 21, 2007 at 01:12 PM MDT #
Posted by Jesse Kuhnert on September 21, 2007 at 03:19 PM MDT #
Posted by Demian Neidetcher on September 21, 2007 at 05:28 PM MDT #
Thanks Raible, instead of spending the last hr and half writing, I spent it blogging :)
Important stuff, every IT developer should get their head wrapped around this.
Posted by Bill Dudney on September 21, 2007 at 10:03 PM MDT #
Posted by David Thompson on September 22, 2007 at 09:08 AM MDT #
Posted by Rod Johnson on September 22, 2007 at 10:35 AM MDT #
Posted by Eelco Hillenius on September 22, 2007 at 03:44 PM MDT #
Posted by Kai Grabfelder on September 23, 2007 at 04:35 PM MDT #
Posted by Eelco Hillenius on September 24, 2007 at 01:59 AM MDT #
1 / If I were the big client :
I would not pay for Openlogic services. The software stack is way too large, I do not see the benefits (http://www.openlogic.com/products/library.php).
But I would consider paying a support fee to Redhat / Interface21 / and maybe even sourcelabs : they provide an integration of selected & tested opensource components (by the way I would evaluate just using appfuse and paying nothing ;)
And I would consider hiring a guy like Matt to solve my problems (that's what linkedin did I think ! ).
2 / As a developper :
I can just fill a bug report / new feature to enhance Spring or Appfuse, for free.
And if the feature is necessary for my client/employer, I can work on it during the day, being paid to do it. Maybe I won't have the right to share the code, but I will ask. And no one could retain me from submitting a jira with some clues on how to solve the problem !
I just hope every companies will not pay for "the magic ubiquitous open source support company", because then they won't need java opensource specialists (consultants or employees) . But I'm confident ;)
Posted by Simon Lebettre on September 24, 2007 at 11:25 AM MDT #
Spring is definitely not the cute, lightweight framework from 3 years back..
Before: "Spring will not try to replace existing solutions or push its own technologies"
Now: "Spring-Webservices is the best thing since sliced bread. Oh wait, we have a whole portofolio to sell you.."
Before: "Spring allows to keep your code portable, avoiding proprietary lock-in"
Now: "Please use these Spring-specific AspectJ extensions (bean() pcd etc)"
Before: "Spring is driven by feedback from the developer community"
Now: "Thanks you for your suggestions. We're not planning any additional work on Spring MVC at this point. However, stay tuned for exciting new features coming to the next version of Spring Webflow"
And on, and on..
Posted by Dave Williams on September 24, 2007 at 02:22 PM MDT #
I've never had anything but positive dealings with i21, and I've never had any with Rod outside of this day. The few Spring guys I've spoken with face to face have been intelligent, friendly, and constructive.
Speaking personally, I will (and have, if you count stupld little build.xml patches) give any bug I fix or enhancement I add to Spring directly back to them on their JIRA. SourceLabs supports me, as well as of all our other committers, in this, and I wouldn't work for anyone that tried to stop me from giving back to the community.
All -- thanks for the thoughtful replies, and Rod, thanks for Spring.
Posted by Ben Speakmon on September 24, 2007 at 04:12 PM MDT #