Slashdot Mirror


Oracle Shuttering OpenSSO

mdm42 writes "OpenSSO is one of the best open source web Single Sign On projects out there. Sun Microsystems made OpenSSO open source in 2008, so it's sad to see how, after absorbing Sun, Oracle is shutting down this amazing project, labelling it 'not strategic' and dismembering the few parts they think are worthwhile for their own SSO effort. They started by freezing the next express release, and during the last few weeks they have been removing all the open source downloads from the OpenSSO website and removing content from the wiki. Fortunately, a Norwegian company called ForgeRock has stepped up to the plate in an attempt to salvage the project under the new name OpenAM."

4 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. Risks and Benefits of OSS by olyar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As much as this is a bummer, it's actually a great example of the OSS model at work.

    If this was a closed source solution, where the company got acquired and the product wasn't strategic, the solution would just be gone.

    With OSS though, another company - for whom the solution is strategic - can step in and pick up the project.

    --
    Custom, hands-free Linux installs. Instalinux
    1. Re:Risks and Benefits of OSS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not true.

      Let me cite an example in the exact same market space: CA acquired Netegrity because they wanted SiteMinder even though they (CA) already had a web SSO product. In addition to SiteMinder (their main business) Netegrity had a provisioning product. After the acquisition closed CA shot their in house SSO product and shot Netegrity's provisioning product.

      CA would never have even considered selling either product to anyone else at any price for two reasons:
      * why compete with a product you created when you already own it
      and
      * it's better to migrate your existing customers on the "to be killed" product over to the strategic product than to sell them off along with the product you're killing.

      This happens throughout the software industry every time there's an acquisition and some overlapping products. The acquirer decides which products will live on, which will be shot immediately and which will be put onto life support until customers can be gently moved off onto the strategic product.

      The only difference here, as the grandparent says, is that someone can grab the code and resources and carry on.

  2. Re:This is the way of MySQL too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a Snorkel employee (Sun->Oracle) I'll add a simple comment. If it isn't profitable or strategic, it will be shuttered or turned loose to the community to support. It is *as simple as that*.

  3. Re:This is the way of MySQL too? by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reality check: Nobody buys a company and just carries on because unless it was really mispriced in the market, you've gained nothing. You might as well have put the money in a stock fund. In closed source companies this means projects get canceled, reprioritized, product portfolios are aligned and they search high and low for the claimed synergies they were supposed to get. What happens in open source companies? Exactly this same. There's been quite a few of these stories now and they're all full of trivial projects and tin foil hat conspiracy. I just checked Digg and THEY got better stories than this. I'm quite the geek but still... stuff that matters. Or is at least cool, interesting or funny in a nerdy way. But not "Minor corporate politics" for 100$, I'll pass Alex.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings