Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion
Hi, We are a product based company named Daffodil Software Ltd, based in India. We have developed many good products using JAVA out of which our two premium product Daffodil DB (an RDBMS) and Daffodil Replicator (database utility software) is largely accepted by world software community. We are planning to make our Daffodil Replicator an open source project. How can we make it with www.apache.org please let us know how we have to proceed. I visited at http://incubator.apache.org but unable to find the answer how to proceed in order to make our product open source. So I am mailing you. I also want to join apache as member. Thanks in anticipation Regards, Ashish Srivastava www.daffodildb.com -Original Message- From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 1:30 PM To: Ashish Srivastava Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion Ashish Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > > We are a product based company named Daffodil Software Ltd, based in > India. We have developed many good products using JAVA out of which our > two premium product Daffodil DB (an RDBMS) and Daffodil Replicator > (database utility software) is largely accepted by world software community. > > We are planning to make our Daffodil Replicator an open source project. > How can we make it with _www.apache.org_ <http://www.apache.org> , > please let us know how we have to proceed. New projects that come at Apache go through the Incubator. You can find some information on the website: http://incubator.apache.org/ If you have further questions, feel free to contact the Incubator on the general mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe send a mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] - verba volant, scripta manent - (discussions get forgotten, just code remains) - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion
Hi Noel, >"Replicator integrates impeccably with all .. JDBC drivers" Daffodil Replicator is a tool which works on databases to create publication, subscription and merging the replicated data. To interact with databases Daffodil Replicator uses JDBC driver interface and it also assumes that base database supports following: * All basic data types * Primary key support * Triggers with: * Provision of getting old and new values * Row level triggers or any alternate way to achieve row level feature (as given in SQL-Server) * Auto increment field support or sequence support Daffodil Replicator is compatible to SQL-Server, Oracle and Daffodil DB. Providing support with additional database a very small task, we just only need to override the methods of one generic class which maps the datatypes and SQL syntax. We are very interested in making Daffodil Replicator compatible to Axiom and Derby databases. The developer community has shown great interest in this product which we are able to gauge from the high ratings given by well know software index web sites like www.jars.com <http://www.jars.com/> , Zaurus <http://www.killefiz.de/zaurus/> Software Index etc. You can download the current version of Daffodil Replicator from http://www.daffodildb.com:8080/eval/filldetails.jsp Regards, Ashish Srivastava www.daffodildb.com <http://www.daffodildb.com/> -Original Message- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 4:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Ashish Srivastava Subject: RE: Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion Ashish Srivastava wrote: > We are planning to make our Daffodil Replicator an open source project. I have read the information at http://www.daffodildb.com/dbreplicator.php , but it is unclear from "Replicator integrates impeccably with all Daffodil database products as well as with selected third-party databases that provide JDBC drivers" to what extent Daffodil Replicator would work with other databases. If you are interested in contributing to replication that would work with Axion and Derby, please let us know. The key issue, however, is community interest. We would want to see interest from within the ASF, or an existing community outside the ASF. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion
We have decided to make Daffodil Replicator an open source with Apache. We have a team of 75 professionals who developed Daffodil DB and Daffodil Replicator. And will continue working with same after making it open source. Any suggestion or comment? Project Description: Daffodil Replicator is a powerful data replication utility which allows the users to work off line and can merge the data when get online. Daffodil Replicator is platform independent software based on JDBC driver. Any Database which supports JDBC Driver with Triggers and procedure can take part in replication either at publication server or on subscription side. Important links: Documentation on Daffodil Replicator is available at: http://www.daffodildb.com/pdf/daffodil_replicator.pdf Evaluation version of Daffodil Replicator is available at: http://www.daffodildb.com:8080/eval/filldetails.jsp
RE: Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion
Hi Brian, Thanks for the encouraging words! We at Daffodil Software are keen on taking the OS route and have planned to donate our Replicator product / tool as the first step. The source can be made available to you via our website. I would be sending you the login details regarding the same at the earliest. As of now, no one at Daffodil Software is involved with ASF hopefully all that will change soon. We would be more than happy for you to 'champion' the proposal, and also decide upon the right 'sponsor' for the same. Is there a sample proposal someone at ASF could send across, so that we could use it as a template for our proposal? Eagerly awaiting your reply. Regards, Ashish Srivastava www.daffodildb.com -Original Message- From: Brian McCallister [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 4:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion This sounds like a great tool! Offline synching for any JDBC compliant database with triggers and procedures is good stuff. Are the sources available anywhere right now? The general steps to enter incubation are described in the document: http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html Is anyone involved with the Daffodil Replicator already involved with the ASF? I ask as the next step is to generate a formal proposal, which entails a nomination my an ASF member ( http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles ) and deciding on a sponsor (either the incubator PMC, the board, or an existing TLP -- Daffodil sounds like it may fit well into the db.apache.org project, I invite you to bring up conversation on [EMAIL PROTECTED]). -Brian On Aug 10, 2004, at 3:30 AM, Ashish Srivastava wrote: > We have decided to make Daffodil Replicator an open source with Apache. > We have a team of 75 professionals who developed Daffodil DB and > Daffodil Replicator. And will continue working with same after making > it > open source. > > Any suggestion or comment? > > Project Description: > > Daffodil Replicator is a powerful data replication utility which allows > the users to work off line and can merge the data when get online. > > Daffodil Replicator is platform independent software based on JDBC > driver. Any Database which supports JDBC Driver with Triggers and > procedure can take part in replication either at publication server or > on subscription side. > > Important links: > > Documentation on Daffodil Replicator is available at: > http://www.daffodildb.com/pdf/daffodil_replicator.pdf > > Evaluation version of Daffodil Replicator is available at: > http://www.daffodildb.com:8080/eval/filldetails.jsp > > > > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE:Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion
Hi, Thanks for the informative mail. It did go a long way in bettering my understanding with regards to The Apache Software Foundation. However, based on your feedback, the following come to my mind: >Firstly, the code you are considering releasing under an open-source >licence is an add-on to a proprietory product. The ASF is unlikely to >consider adopting that kind of project.. 1. Daffodil Replicator is not an add-on to Daffodil DB (our Java database). It is a standalone product developed in-house by Daffodil Software. Daffodil Replicator use the standard JDBC driver interface to interact with databases. It is not interacting with any Daffodil DB's internal API. 2. With regards to your comment about the 'group of developers' and the fact that the 'code you are considering releasing can only be used with a proprietary database', the following: Replicator can be used by the following databases - SQL-Server, Oracle, Daffodil DB. (Note: These three databases have been tested with Replicator. I don't see why Replicator cannot be used with ALL others. However, testing needs to be done on the same.) Also, we can commit 20 - 30 developers from our talent pool, who can contribute from Day 1. Moreover, our forum (http://www.daffodildb.com:8080/forum) can be a good place to build up a pool of contributors. 3. Regarding Cloudscape, we are not sure if (or not) it provides support of Triggers and Multiple statements procedure (like PL/SQL in Oracle). If it does, we can ensure compatibility. (We would need some testing to be done, but that's not an issue.) On the other hand, if support of the said features doesn't exist, we can create the same. However, this would need access to the Derby source code. 4. Regarding our paradigm and business-model, we can (at this point of time) say that the objective for going the 'open source' way is singular: To build a robust product and a robust brand, at the same time leveraging the advantages of Open Source. Regards, Ashish Srivastava www.daffodildb.com PS: Please mark a CC to me for reply of this mail (although I subscribed the mailing list but I am unable to receive some mails) Subject: Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion From: Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 13:10:17 +1200 On Sat, 2004-08-07 at 05:20, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > Ashish Srivastava wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We are a product based company named Daffodil Software Ltd, based in > > India. We have developed many good products using JAVA out of which our > > two premium product Daffodil DB (an RDBMS) and Daffodil Replicator > > (database utility software) is largely accepted by world software > > community. > > > > We are planning to make our Daffodil Replicator an open source project. > > > > How can we make it with www.apache.org please let us know how we have to > > proceed. > > > > I visited at http://incubator.apache.org but unable to find the answer > > how to proceed in order to make our product open source. > > I'm cross-posting to lists where there might be interest in helping you > out on this. > > > www.daffodildb.com Hi Ashish, The following is just my personal opinion, as a member of the ASF (Apache Software Foundation); I am not speaking on behalf of the ASF. I think it is great that you are considering releasing some of your code under an open-source licence. I am sure there are a number of people that are willing to offer advice on the process of releasing your code as open-source. And if you do this, you are certainly welcome to reuse the Apache Public License legal document as the base for the license terms you release your code under; the ASF and its legal advisors deliberately designed the license in a way that makes it easy for non-ASF-hosted projects to use. However if you are suggesting that the code you release may be hosted and maintained by the Apache Software Foundation, I personally think this is unlikely to happen. Firstly, the code you are considering releasing under an open-source licence is an add-on to a proprietory product. The ASF is unlikely to consider adopting that kind of project. This doesn't mean that making the code open-source is a bad idea, it's just something that the ASF usually avoids being involved with. Secondly when the ASF adopts existing code, the provider of the code is expected to show evidence that there is a group of developers willing to continue maintenance and development of the code in the future. Apache doesn't want to end up hosting lots of code with no associated developers. Given that the code you are considering releasing can only be used with a proprietory database which does not have a large market share, I think this will b
Re: RE:Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion
Dear Simon, I must thank you for you mail each time that you send one, simply because it clears so much in terms of our understanding. Please find my answers / thoughts below. > Then that is *much* more likely to be of interest to the ASF. Thanks for > clarifying that. Thanks for the positive responce. Much appreciated. > There is one thing to keep in mind for the future: developing > open-source is different from developing "in-house". There have been > cases in the past where code has been released as "open-source", but the > development procedures of the original team have not adapted to the new > environment. In particular, the existing team need to be able to allow > others to influence decisions, must ensure all decisions are discussed > openly on email lists, etc. Open-source development really is a > different culture. I guess people who know more about this can provide > further advice if this goes ahead. We totally understand and appreciate your view point. Once Replicator is made 'open', there will be shared responsibility for the code, and everyones decision will be respected. All we can say at this point of time is that that we are willing to adapt newer development procedures, as per the concenses of all contributors. > This really is a bit vague. If your company is really going to pay 20 > developers to work at least part-time on a product that is downloadable > for free, the question "why?" immediately springs to mind. :0)Nice point. 20 developers will work part time (This figure could be 10, 15, 20 or 30) beacuse, as you said, there would need to be a critical mass of initial contributors. If there are developers out there who consider Replicator an exiting project to work on, then we wouldnt need to deploy this number. It could come down to 3 - 5 developers. > My current employer gave me permission to contribute some code developed > on company time to one of the Apache projects. This is because the code > was useful to us, but not something that gives us any competitive > advantage over competitors. By contributing, therefore, it cost nothing > but ensured that code we use was maintained and improved as part of the > project. > > This argument doesn't apply to you, though. From what you've described, > this tool can be used with many different databases. So what *are* > Daffodil's reasons for releasing this code you've paid people to create > as Open Source? Nice point again. I have attempted to answer the same below. > Do you want to make the company name "Daffodil" more widely known in > order to boost sales of your core product, ie you are using Open Source > as advertising? This is a perfectly reasonable motivation, but you need > to ensure that what you lose (loss of sales of this product + expenses > of development wages) are not greater than your gains. I'm not sure what > the ASF's policy is regarding including info on the original contributor > with future releases (I think they *do* provide reasonable attribution > of code to the original author, but you should check if this is > important to you). > > Or do you regard the replicator as an add-on but not part of your core > products, and therefore want to share the development/maintenance costs > of this tool with other db suppliers? > > Or do you think this replicator product will be wildly successful and > that as the original author you are well positioned to make money > providing support contracts for the open-source version (the "Red Hat" > model), or by selling "enhanced versions", or by selling the rights to > incorporate the code in other companies' proprietory offerings (the > MySQL model)? A bit of all actually. Let me explain. Replicator is not our core offering. We have developed it in order to make data replication possible across hetrogeneous databases. While there are many databases available in the market, a product like Replicator (and here I temporarily bid farewell to modesty) is unique not only in its design, but also in its ability to communicate with different brands of databases. We do expect it be very successful; however, lots of work needs to be done on the same. Primarily, we need to ensure that Replicator can communicate with every known database server. Once that is done, a suitable business model (Red Hat, MySQL etc) can be built around it. The branding boost won't hurt either.;0) Just one thing ... Can we get some feedback from readers of this mail with regards to the provision of 'reasonable' attribution of code to the original author? > Again, I am only speaking for myself here, but showing the reasons for > your release of code will help people believe that Daffodil is indeed > serious about ongoing support of the code and is serious about > transferring power over the project from itself to the open-source > community that may form around the project. Of course if your company > owners are simply motivated by goodwill to the world and willing to pay > developers to w
Re: Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion
Dear members, Please find attached our thoughts. >I find this rather confusing. One of the criteria for exiting > incubation is a *diverse* set of committers - i.e. an appropriate > proportion of Daffodil "for-pay" developers but also non-Daffodil > folks. If your idea of the original number of committers (coming with > the donation of the project) varies between 3 and 30, I'm rather > suspicious about who you consider to be a committer. Having no idea of > the size of your codebase and your operations, I can tell you that the > usual initial set of committers of other projects hardly ever surpasses > 5 to 8 folks, and the rest will need to be voted in using common ASF > procedures. You as a commercial entity have no control over this other > than what is to be expected in a community project, and the Incubator > will check whether you are following ASF guidelines. Noel, I think that there has been some confusion. The number and profile of committers will be decided by ASF. All we can assure is that we will try to have as many developers / contributors working on the project. Some of them might be on a 'paid' basis, while some might come from our alumni, which currently numbers over 400. We dont know (as of now) how many there will be, however all we can say is that we will try and motivate as many people as we can. > To give you an idea about what is decent to add to an ASF distribution, > have a look at the Cocoon CREDITS: > http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/cocoon/trunk/CREDITS.txt? > rev=30946&root=Apache-SVN&view=markup Thanks for the above info. > Apart from such a file, it will be hard to find other attributions in > the Cocoon codebase linkable to a specific single commercial entity, > since having these would carry a false sense of ownership over the code > or project. Of course, our license permits repackaging and > redistribution, so you could always redistribute a more commercially > labeled version of the code through your own website, perhaps with some > value-added services, bearing in mind that the ASF license requires you > to link back to us as the originators of the code. I understand that this would mean that the ownership of Replicator would lie with ASF, and Daffodil (like anyone else) would be free to 'redistribute a more commercially labeled version of the code through your own website, perhaps with some value-added services, bearing in mind that the ASF license requires you to link back to us as the originators of the code.' Is my understanding correct? > Basically, Daffodil becomes Apache Daffodil, and it is up to you to > build a business model around this publicly available ASF project, but > the ASF will not serve as a "daffodil.org" entity alongside your > "daffodil.com". I hope I'm making myself clear here. You *will* be > relinquishing control up to the level that you carefully need to check > whether this is what you want. Point taken. > Another common issue is the inclusion of non-ASL licensed dependencies. > The ASF currently has a policy of not redistributing LGPL/GPL-licensed > code. Does your project depends on such code? Also, is there any way to > assess what you are planning to donate? No, our Replicator does not incorporate *any* LGPL/GPL-licensed code. We would be more than willing to provide you with a link on our website, which would give you access to the Replicator code. > Lastly, I would seriously recommend you to approach the db.apache.org > project as well, which might help you to recruit some sponsors and/or > interested developers. Thanks a lot for your advice Noel. We will be looking to the db.apache.org project for sponsors and / or developers. We will also be starting a fresh thread on this address, to understand what could / should / would be the business model for Daffodil Software (based upon a possible commercial fork of Replicator.) Best, Ashish > HTH, > > > -- > Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/ > Outerthought - Open Source Java & XMLAn Orixo Member > Read my weblog athttp://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/ > stevenn at outerthought.orgstevenn at apache.org > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
