Re: [OGo-Users] Some impressions and comments about OGo

>   I personally found it hard to get OGo running.  

This is a common complaint;  and I think it is partially valid.

VALID - 
(1) The OGo packaging is rough and some packages don't enforce their own
prerequisites / dependencies.  
(2) Links to the current / valid documentation are not prominent enough.

INVALID -
(1) OGo is a complex package,  people trying to install it without
**FIRST** reading the documentation should expect to have problems.
Nobody whips out an M$-Exchange CD pops it in the drive,  double clicks
install.exe, and then charges through the installing merrily clicking
random options.  Or if they do they will probably not end up with the
configuration they want.  There is an entirely unrealistic and
unreasonable expectation that enterprise applications install as easily
and in as straight-forward a manner as desktop applications.
(2) Part of this issue is distribution.  Installation on openSUSE
usually takes only minutes.  To function properly OGo needs an
appropriately configured PostgreSQL, Apache, & MTA.  Script magic can
only do so much to provide that - administrators should *EXPECT* to have
to setup these services.  If the current configuration differs from the
default or the distribution has done something torturous in packaging
the service there isn't any solution except reading the documentation
and setting up the service appropriately.  How to setup the services
manually is very specifically described in WMOGAG.

http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/whitemice/wmogag/file_view

> It didn't stop me from 
> installing it, but the process was involved and error prone enough for 
> me to not want to do it again - I even wrote install scripts so I 
> wouldn't have to.  

It should be easier to install,  but is really hard.  Of course, it is
an Open Source project.... "patches welcome".

>   I installed OGo initially because I had read it worked with Sunbird 
> over CalDAV - yes, I'm another one of these people looking for an open 
> source Exchange.  

CalDAV/GroupDAV isn't anywhere near a "replacement" for Exchange.  But I
understand the meaning. :)

> Even though I'd happily sell Outlook connectors to 
> clients I want a calendar server I can use in a Linux client/server 
> environment myself.  

Sure.

> I understand CalDAV is horribly complex, but the 
> first server to connect to a CalDAV/GroupDAV client reliably will 
> collect a HUGE number of users. 

Agree.  But that won't happen magickally, and OGo is an Open Source
project....  

>  GroupDAV probably won't be implemented 
> on a client before CalDAV is, so if OpenGroupware waits for a GroupDAV 

You are implying that you found CalDAV/GroupDAV not to work?

> client it will have lost first-mover advantage.  Not only that, but it 
> will sound inferior to potential new users as GroupDAV is a subset of 

No, GroupDAV is not a subset of CalDAV.   CalDAV is specific to
calendering.  GroupDAV provides for contact information.

> CalDAV (even if CalDAV turns out to be less stable in early 
> implementations).

CalDAV & GroupDAV are complimentary.  AFAIK the GroupDAV support works.
The CalDAV support "works" but with some issues.  On the later I believe
the Sunbird/Lighting team is looking into it.

> I think Skyrix could do a few extra things to get $$$'s.  Yes, the 
> Outlook connector and support options are good, but Digium/Asterisk has 
> fostered an industry around itself - Skyrix should attempt to do the 
> same.  

I don't have any affiliation with Skyrix so I don't speak for them.

To some extent there is an industry around OGo.  There is me -
http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com/  There are some consultants in
Wisconsin, but I can't remember their name.  There is list at - 
http://www.opengroupware.org/en/users/support/usa.html and lists for
other countries.

[I'm not vouching for any mentioned name, or know if the list is
current,  but saying there is nobody is incorrect].

Part of the issue is that groupware is a tough niche.  Many of those who
use groupware are USING it, as in, they are into doing something
else. :)  They view the product as a tool and aren't usually interesting
in contributing back to the community ["Huh?"] or what they create with
OGo is entirely proprietary.  Witness -
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=ddv5htgd_14zrg6zm&hl=en
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=ddv5htgd_0sb385m&hl=en
 - yep, that is OpenGroupware.
The uses and native environment for groupware is much different than a
more general purpose tool like a file server, mail server, PBX, etc...
which essentially everyone needs.    Also "groupware" is a rather
nebulous term which to many people means different things, this hampers
development.  I've been using OGo since 2003, and starting looking for
groupware solutions ~2001.  The number of "groupware" projects I've seen
flame-out is very long.  It also seems to attract a fair number of what
I will kindly call "cranks" who generate an enormous amount of mail and
little to none of either specific requirements/issues or code.  The
openoffice groupware sub-project is a perfect example of great potential
flattened by "cranks".

> Customisation of OGo themes would be the first I'd consider.  It 
> would be easy to outsource, and some corporate types will pay a fortune 
> to customise their intranets to a company theme.  

Possibly.  However customizing the OGo theme only gets you so far, and
the docs plone has lots of examples on that.  Most of what I've
encountered is that companies either use OGo straight-up and don't much
care about things like themes.  Or they actually want to integrate OGo
into their system/intranets and thus want components that work with OGo
and not so much the WebUI re-themed.  Thus there is the MooTools based
OGo calendar - http://forum.mootools.net/viewtopic.php?id=5933 -
http://mail.opengroupware.org/pipermail/developer/2007-October/003221.html

> Training organisations 
> often buy copyrighted training/lesson plans etc.. 

What do you think WMOGAG is?
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/whitemice/wmogag/file_view
I don't sell it, but no customer in their right mind is going to deploy
and pour information into a server for which there isn't a manual.  

They may not read the manual, but there has to be one. :)

> Resellers might be in the market for 
> off-the-shelf quality marketing materials and/or user manual 
> hardcopies.  

Nah,  I've talked to publishers.  The market for IT oriented texts is in
a death spiral,  notice how many titles have been around forever without
updates.  Your odds of getting a new administration oriented text, of
almost any stripe, published are extremely thin.  People are quite
satisfied with PDFs,  they might like a physical manual but they are
rarely willing to *pay* for one.


-- 
OpenGroupware.org Discussion [email protected]
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss