I wondered when someone from an open source company was going to join battle on this one....
A basic fact that the writer of the article seems to ignore is that there are many different types of open source licences and business models. WSO2 is a good example of an open source company structured to make its money by offering commercial levels of service. Such companies are not just an enthusiastic bunch of programmers knocking up a piece of software for the hell of it. This commercial approach to open source has another advantage: it means that the controlling company not only has direct user feedback through its support services, but can approach product and feature development with a real knowledge of customer needs and aspirations. Gervas --- In [email protected], Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanj...@...> wrote: > > Ozawa-san, I think most of the open source technologies Dion listed have > companies offering 24x7x365 support. > > In our case (WSO2), we consistently get customer feedback about how our > support is MUCH BETTER than that offered by Oracle, IBM etc.. And yes, we > take full blame too if something goes wrong, even though often its the > customer's own doing. > > Its pure myth to say that going with open source SOA means there's no > support. You just have to pick the right one :-). > > Sanjiva. > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 5:10 AM, Hitoshi Ozawa <htshoz...@...> wrote: > > > > > > > Enjoyable article, but I think the article a little short-sighted in > > implicitly expressing that technology such as SOAP is sufficient for > > interoperability. > > The question with open-source solution is the quality and whether there is > > a good 24x365 hour support. It's also ironical, but even if the vendor > > solution requires many months to resolve defects, it's preferred over open > > source solutions because there's a clear party where blame can be placed. > > :-) > > > > H.Ozawa > > > > 2009/12/12 Gervas Douglas <gervas.doug...@...> > > > > > >> > >> <<It's a truism that you don't have to buy software to deliver on SOA, > >> which is primarily a style of technical architecture and business strategy > >> and isn't really something you can go out and purchase. > >> > >> But it's also true that enabling software can make the job of delivering > >> on SOA 10x easier. Or on occasion, though hopefully not, much worse (10x > >> harder.) But if software can indeed really help make the transition to SOA > >> faster and easier, then the situation today is increasingly becoming a > >> head-to-head competition between commercial and open source SOA solutions.. > >> > >> It should be pointed out that the technical support for SOA, at least in > >> terms of creating interoperable services, has long been built into most > >> modern development stacks today, whether that is .NET, J2EE, and to a > >> lesser > >> degree even the now-rapidly proliferating cloud computing platforms. > >> > >> However -- especially when it comes to the full spectrum of SOA > >> requirements -- no pure play development platform has it all when it comes > >> to the technical capabilities of the modern SOA with its need for many > >> flavors of service, management, metering, security, and the need to easily > >> connect to hundreds of types of underlying datasets. This means that > >> despite > >> whatever technology platforms you're using today, you'll either need to > >> develop additional SOA capabilities, buy them, or increasingly, adopt a > >> community-based solution. > >> > >> [image: SOA Success Formula: Business Architecture + Interoperability + > >> Governance] > >> > >> Thus many of today's enterprise-class SOA efforts have made investments of > >> some kind in software to support development, testing, security, > >> management, > >> and governance across today's service-oriented architecture spectrum. > >> Credible open source alternatives to commercial SOA products have been > >> emerging for quite a while now but I'm only now seeing a relatively sudden > >> and noticeable uptick in both interest in as well as the completeness of > >> the > >> offerings themselves. > >> > >> Part of this is no doubt the recession and is due to cost sensitivity, but > >> the rest is the compelling nature and maturity of the latest open source > >> SOA > >> offerings. The transparency of and ability to influence open source > >> projects > >> continues to be no small factor either as implementers struggle with more > >> opaque less-frequently updated commercial products.. > >> > >> Since SOA can and should be highly strategic to the way companies operate > >> at their core, deciding to build on community-built solutions can feel like > >> a big step that is rife with implications for those who may have to bet > >> their career on their SOA decisions. This brings us full circle back to the > >> title of this piece: Is open source, a world that's more steeped in the > >> sometimes anti-establishment free software movement and consumer Web > >> development, really going to deliver on the increasingly sophisticated > >> requirements of serious "big enterprise" SOA efforts? > >> > >> The answer is, as with many complex issues, "it depends." > >> > >> To understand if open source can provide additional value to SOA today > >> over commercial products we have to consider where it helps improve some > >> key > >> aspects of SOA. From my perspective, there are generally three top level > >> requirements for a successful SOA effort: > >> > >> - *Business architecture*. If you are creating services but with no > >> strategic plan, you're just doing low-level integration. It still has > >> value > >> but the big gains in SOA come from a resilient, adaptive global plan > >> implemented locally -- see my piece on fixing modern enterprise > >> > >> architecture<http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/enterprise/2009/09/fixing_enterprise_architecture.php>for > >> more details -- that gives the whole organization a way of thinking > >> about a component-based business that is shared, pluggable, connectable, > >> reusable, and highly evolvable. Tools have limited impact to this key > >> aspect > >> of SOA but some modeling, repository, and policy solutions can certainly > >> help. Open source is not very strong in these places for SOA yet > >> (though if > >> I'm wrong, I'd love to hear about it in comments below.) > >> - *Interoperability.* This is *the* core way that SOA delivers its > >> value by enabling reusable business services and data, pulling down > >> silos > >> along the way. Without this the higher order functions such as BPM and > >> orchestration can't be achieved. In my experience there are a > >> surprisingly > >> large number of enemies to interoperability including standards > >> themselves > >> sometimes, which in the SOA space are many and varied and complied with > >> differently. Most know I'm increasingly of the view that simple > >> services enable the most value > >> creation<http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/enterprise/2009/10/the_services_continuum_expandi.php>, > >> but either way, open source vendors now can deliver on all but the most > >> advanced interoperability requirements (toolkit variations, programming > >> language/platform support, service types such as SOAP and REST, schema > >> incompatibility) and to a lesser extent QoS, governance, and some > >> security > >> requirements. > >> - *Governance.* Software support for activities related to exercising > >> control over services in an SOA is one part of governance. This > >> function, > >> like business architecture, is only partially a technical one and while > >> tools can certainly help, this is one area where open source is still > >> fairly > >> weak. > >> > >> So for now, open source is fairly limited in two of the three top level > >> aspects of SOA while being strongest in the actual implementation of > >> services and process automation. In this realm, the only place that open > >> source SOA seems significantly limited at the moment is in the number of > >> adapters to different back-end enterprise data sources and in open source > >> mashup development tools. This, unfortunately, is one of the critical > >> barriers to tapping into the value of SOA and so for now, I'd give open > >> source a qualified yes as part of a mature SOA strategy with the caveat > >> that > >> it's not possible to build a fully open source enterprise SOA stack today. > >> > >> The bottom line here is that open source solutions can provide real value > >> to SOA efforts today, both in terms of reductions in up-front cost as well > >> as other the attendant benefits of open source including the ability to > >> directly influence product evolution, more transparent architecture, as > >> long > >> as its functional strengths in service fabric are clearly understood and > >> respected. > >> > >> *Related: Where is SOA headed? Where the Web > >> Goes...<http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/enterprise/2009/09/where_is_soa_heading_where_the.php> > >> * > >> > >> As for the future, I believe it's highly likely the open source will > >> continue to encroach on the commercial SOA space especially on the more > >> technical aspects of the practice. But for the foreseeable future, > >> commercial solutions with strong integration with other commercial > >> products, > >> as well as governance software that also has strong commercial product > >> awareness, will continue to have a sustained and significant advantage. If > >> your organization is already far down the road on implementing an open > >> source software strategy, then you will probably find open source SOA about > >> to hit prime time for you and unlikely to fail to meet your needs in the > >> medium to long term. However, companies with a strong COTS presence in > >> their > >> application portfolios will have to be much more careful to ensure their > >> open source tools can play well and deeply integrate with their data. > >> > >> *Sidebar:* Software AG's Chief Strategist Miko Matsumura replied to a > >> Twitter query I issued on open source SOA today, summarizing the current > >> situation in a pithy way that only 140 characters can enforce: "*my > >> opinion on Open Source SOA stuff--upfront cost=A++ infrastructure=B+ (great > >> standards support poor adapters) governance D-.*" Well said. > >> > >> What are good examples of open source SOA? I encourage you to take a look > >> at Apache Tuscany <http://tuscany.apache.org/%22>, Apache > >> Synapse<http://synapse.apache.org/>, > >> FUSE <http://fusesource.com/>, JBOSS Open Source > >> SOA<http://www.jboss.com/products/platforms/soa/>, > >> jBPM <http://www.jboss.org/jbossjbpm/>, > >> Drools<http://www.jboss.org/drools/>, > >> Esper <http://esper.codehaus.org/>, Petals <http://petals.ow2.org/>, and > >> all of the WSO2 suite <http://wso2.org/>. > >> > >> *Are you exploring open source SOA? Why or why not?>>* > >> *You can read this at: > >> http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/enterprise/2009/12/is_the_future_of_soa_open_sour.php > >> > >> Gervas* > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D. > Founder, Director & Chief Scientist; Lanka Software Foundation; > http://www.opensource.lk/ > Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/ > Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ > Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/ > > Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/ >
