I'm searching for a main difference between OpenShift Origin and OpenShift Enterprise. I know that the first is open source and the latter is the commercial version. Have OpenShift Enterprise got other features compared to the open source version?
Thanks in advance.
Update 3/21/2018: If you find this old answer of mine in the future, Enterprise is called "OpenShift Container Platform" now.
The community version goes faster, but with change comes some risk. If you would like to be an early adopter Origin could be your choice. Note: support is best effort by the community, but I have found very helpful people on IRC and on the project's github page.
Link: https://github.com/openshift/origin
The enterprise version has the advantage of professional support for your money. While you won't get features as early, in exchange there is focus on stability and streamlining. This may be important for enterprises. Some solutions / examples may not work exactly the same way. For example application templates, utilities come as part of packages for RHEL users. It also comes with some entitlements for things like RHEL and CloudForms integration.
I tried installing a one master, one node small cluster with both, and found them just as good.
In short, stability or early adoption. Oh, and bugfixes.
Personally I prefer to go with Origin, as you can monitor the state of the project yourself and you are not forced to jump on every coming train. Update when suitable.
OpenShift Origin is the open source community version of OpenShift Enterprise. In order to understand what this means, you need to understand what open source software is - computer software developed via a competitive collaborative model from many individual sources. Origin updates as often as open source developers contribute via git, a version control system, sometimes as often as several times per week.
OpenShift Enterprise 3integrates with Red Hat Enterprise Linux and is tested via Red Hat's QA process in order to offer a stable, supportable product for customers who want to have their own private or onsite cloud. Enterprise might update around every six months, maintaining stabilization across minor updates. Providing timely professional support for each query they have from installation/POC to the production.
Related
Planning to Migrate the Websphere from 7.0 to 9 and 8.5 to 9.
Can anyone help me getting the detailed Process
Migration here is "In place". (Migration will be done on the same servers, where the old Installation are in)
if at all any migration tools need to be used, please provide the clear info on them.
any documental references, or any video references for the questioner is appreciated.
OS used : RHEL
CUrrent version: WAS 7x and 8.5
Migrating to : WAS 9.0
It sounds like you're in the very beginning stages of doing this migration. Therefore, I highly recommend you take some time to plan this out, especially to figure out the exact steps you'll be taking and how you'll handle something going wrong. For WebSphere, there is a collection of documents from IBM that discuss planning and executing the upgrade. Look around there for documentation on the tools and step by step guides for different kinds of topologies. The step by step guide for an in place migration of a cell is here.
You should make sure to take good backups before you start the process so you can restore back to before the migration if you need to.
In addition to doing the upgrade, an important part is to also make sure your applications are going to work on the new version if you haven't already. IBM provides this tool to scan applications and identify potential issues that developers will have to fix. There is documentation for the tool at that link as well.
If you are in the planning phase, I'd strongly suggest you to consider migrating to WebSphere Liberty instead of traditional WAS v9. All these migration tools (toolkit for binaries, Eclipse migration toolkit) support both migration scenarios.
Choosing Liberty might be a bit more work at the beginning, but you will gain more deployment flexibility and speed up future development. Liberty is also much better fitted for any cloud/containers environments, as it is much more lightweight, so in the future, if you would like to move to containers, it would be much easier.
Check this tutorial Migrate traditional WebSphere apps to WebSphere Liberty on IBM Cloud Private by using Kubernetes, although it shows the steps to migrate to Liberty on ICP, beginning is the same - analyzing of the application whether they are fit for Liberty and migrating. If you don't have access to IBM Cloud or ICP, you can use stand alone version of the Transformation Advisor that was released recently - IBM Cloud Transformation Advisor.
Having said all that, some apps include old or proprietary traditional WebSphere APIs and in that case it may be easier and cheaper to temporary migrate them to WAS v9, and modernize in the future.
My research and development environment calls for a heavily customised TRAC with a corresponding subversion repository and a binary file store (e.g. WebDAV).
I have my eye on at least 10 plugins that I would like to use (from integration with time tracking software, to specialist mathematics/code rendering). I'd also like to write my own plugins.
I am looking for a commercial host that will allow me to self-manage my TRAC plugins. I've looked into (and contacted) a few of the commercial providers from the TRAC Commercial Services list, including:
Project Locker
Repository Hosting
SVN Repository
Project Locker have described that they do a code review of plugin requests and handle it on their end (unspecified time period). Repository Hosting have said that they "will probably not add support for that in the near future". SVN Repository have said "you won't be able to install any new plugins" and have suggested one of their VPS accounts instead.
Short of managing my own VPS or dedicated server, does anybody know of a commercial SVN/TRAC host who allows paying customers to install their own plugins? I would have thought a chroot environment would have made this a no-brainer!
(Note: this was originally posted on programmers but was down-voted and I was advised to move it here. Quoting from their FAQ: implementation issues or programming tools (ask on Stack Overflow instead))
You'll probably find a hard time finding what you're looking for because as Craig mentioned in his comment, the concept of commercial hosting services typically revolves around limiting a customer's ability to customize. Keeping things relatively uniform means that the hosting company can manage systems and deploy automated updates much more easily and won't have to worry about their scripts breaking because of something odd that one customer installed or re-configured.
If you want to be able to install and configure plugins at will, I highly recommend going the VPS route and managing the server yourself. It's easier than you might expect (I was thrown into this situation and was pleasantly surprised). You can start with something like the Bitnami Trac stack, which is a virtual machine image that has a Linux OS plus Trac and all of the support tools (database, webserver, etc) set up and ready to go. If you use that as a starting point, all you should have to do is customize your Trac settings and install your plugins.
If you really don't want to have anything to do with the management aspect, remember that you can always go the VPS route and contract out the administration work separately. It might be easier if the hosting provider and the system admin come from the same company, but it's not a requirement. Given the flexibility and customization that you need, this might be a more realistic option.
I seem to end up evaluating a lot of software. This requires me to constantly install all kinds of things on my system. It creates a huge clutter and I spend a lot of time during the install process, and if I don't like it, then removing everything I've done. Much of my evaluation tends away from the features of the software being evaluated and toward how difficult it is to install. I'm sure I miss good software which may have actually been a better choice, because of this startup cost.
With the advent of VM software like VMWare Player and VirtualBox, it would be much easier to sell someone like me your software, if you just provided an image that I could load into the VM and run. I'd be looking at the features almost immediately rather than fighting with which revision of whatever. The VM would take care of all of this for me.
Am I missing something, or should vendors and OSS start distributing VMs for their wares?
Most of my evaluations are for server side software installed on Linux, so OS licensing is not the issue.
VMs require that the operating system have a valid license key. For free operating systems this wouldn't be an issue, but if you're developing for something like Windows machines, each time they send out a demo version of their software, they're sending out a license key that they would have to pay for.
This would be incredibly expensive for most companies.
The only downside I would say IMHO is the size of the images, if say you have a 20 MB application, do you really want to download/transfer an entire OS just for that application.
I would say a better approach would be to have a ready to go VM and then you simply take a snapshot (on Virtual Box, I assume similar feature exist in other players)
Then simply install the applciation inside your sandbox environment, and then just Zap it when done (i.e. return to your Snapshot)
Darknight
This can be done for softwre that runs on open source platforms, and VMware have a library of images which do just this (though the images that are used for evaluating commercial software is generally for infrastructure-type things that have very, very complex installation requirements):
http://www.vmware.com/appliances/
However, if the software is for the Windows platform, you don't really have the opportunity to do this, as Microsoft's Windows licensing would prevent it. Unless, you're Microsoft, of course, in which case you can in fact do this - and MS has done this to permit easier evaluation of such software as Visual Studio, SQL, and many others:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/bb738372.aspx?ppud=4
Novell has an appliance builder called Suse Studio that lets you pick the software you want, it builds out a VM with the software (and dependencies, etc) for you. You can then try out the VM, download it, etc.
Whether the software you're looking for is available or not is a different matter.
Disclaimer: I work for Novell (though not with the Suse team)
But yes, if you can deal with the OS licensing issues, or possibly host trial environments yourself, this is a very effective way for a vendor to demo their app. The problem is that all vendors don't always have the infrastructure (or lack the awareness) to do so.
Microsoft provides fully-provisioned VM's for time-limited trials of their software. So if you want to trial select Microsoft products in that manner, you can do that today.
There is no sign, though, that Microsoft will make this available to third party Windows software vendors.
In the SaaS (Software-as-a-Service) world, you can get fully-provisioned virtual servers that include Windows and your software of interest on a pay-as-you-go basis, based on both Linux and Windows. For example, see Amazon Web Services
For windows, you may be better off developing a portable application that runs from a usb key. That is how Embarcadero distribute All Access. I received a 4 gb usb key that contained multiple applications. Most could be run straight from the key without installation. I believe Embarcadero will be licensing the technology at some stage.
If you are using a programming language such as Delphi or C++ with little in the way of external dependencies, a portable application is straight forward to develop. For .net, it is much harder, but can be done with Mono, or something like Virtual Application Studio.
I have a question about my MSDN Premium Subscription. This is what I want to setup:
Install Windows Server 2008 (maybe R2) on a Dev Box
Install System Center Virtual Machine Manager 2008 (maybe R2) on the server.
Create several VMs hosted on the server (and maybe some other machines).
I would then use the VMs to Develop, Test and Demo my software (Nothing else)
My question is, on which of these can I use the licenses downloaded from my Subscription? I think #3 is clearly in the scope of the Subscription, but is the Server OS License? Is the Virtual Machine Manager?
Any opinions would be welcome. Any facts (with supporting links or docs) would be very appreciated.
From the main MSDN subscription page you can access the subscription information. The following was copied from that page. "Software Use Rights"
MSDN subscriptions are licensed on a per-user basis. One person can use the software to design, develop, test, or demonstrate his or her programs on any number of devices. Each person who uses the software this way needs a license.
According to this wikipedia article: MSDN
You can use your license to test and develop, but for production level code, you will need a different license.
In these kind of cases, if in doubt, I would give Microsoft a call. They should be able to give you a definite answer.
But as far as the license goes, it doesn't look like a problem and my best guess is that you actually can install the host OS, with SCVMM and everything else, as long as you are using that server purely for software development. IANAL, so if you want to have a definite answer: Call Microsoft.
In addition to Kim Major's answer, because of the per-user limitation (e.g. everyone working to a development SQL Server needs an MSDN license) it might be worth looking into an Microsoft Action Pack Subscription through the Partner Network. There are some very specific eligibility requirements but for small dev shops that are developing solutions with Microsoft products it is really useful. As you grow as an organisation you'd move towards Silver then Gold certification.
The basic premise is that Microsoft offer great value subscriptions to developers and get their pay out when your client pays for the production licenses to deploy your solution.
Once again, check the eligibility to be certain you qualify. There is a lot of misunderstanding around this offering.
I start at a new client on Monday. They’re just beginning to do web development (ASP.NET) and I’m going to help them with setting up a proper development environment.
I don’t think I’ll have a say on what type of machines the developers will be using, so this is more of a backend scenario.
So far the main things I’ve come up with include:
Versioning control system (source control).
Bug Database
Doc Repo / Project Management / Tasks
(They are currently using Base Camp by 37 signals, which is a good sign to me.)*
Dev / QA / Staging / Build servers (web, db)
So far this is what I have come up with. I don’t know what budget they have right now, but in your ideal development environment, what else would you recommend that I propose?
Thanks!
You said you won't have input on the machines, but I'd put dual monitors pretty high on the list as far as productivity goes for web development or just computer use in general.
I think, there is no ultimate answer for this. Because each developer has their own opinion - what software they use for VCS, Bug Tracking, etc...
And here is my opinion :)
Ideal for Microsoft Technologies is TFS (Team Foundation Server), which has all the features you want.
And here my list in case you don't want TFS:
Version control system
SVN
Mercurial
GIT
Bug Database / Project Management / Tasks
JIRA
FogBugz
Developers environment
Dual screen
Powerful PC
Quality chair
Whiteboard
Free coffee
This is all very cheap if you compare it to their salary for six months
Development machine: Visual Studio 2008 + VisualSVN/TortoiseSVN + Resharper
Buildserver: Teamcity
LAN testing server: Webserver with build by buildserver + DB with daily copy of live
QA/Staging depends on the project size.