Status update

There has been a lot of confusion on project status lately. Some even wondered if activeCollab has been abandoned!

There has been a lot of confusion and questions regarding current project status and its future. To make thing clearer here are some updates on project status and roadmap updates that took place lately:

activeCollab is not abandoned. It is live and kicking.
Old roadmap is dropped. There will be no 0.7.5 or any other major version in 0.x branch (at least I will not make it but if someone wants to pick up 0.x branch than its not a problem). Next major release is activeCollab 1.0 and it is scheduled for summer 2007. Code in 1.0 branch is not compatible with 0.x code so parallel development is not possible.
New code is PHP4 compatible and does not require InnoDB, GD or PDO. There are also some additions to the framework that make serving AJAX and API calls way easier. Support for plugins is already functional in 1.0 branch.
Improved interface will feature better navigation and page organization, a lot of AJAX calls and new widgets to improve user experience and make things more usable.
To keep the development process focused as possible there will be no public beta versions. All beta testing will be done in hosted environment (to roll out change and fixes more easily). All details about beta testing will be posted when we get in that state.
activeCollab 1.0 and future core development will be developed exclusively by company that I started and community will be able to contribute by developing plugins, themes and translations.

This decisions are made to ensure that by the end of the year we have a product that is easy to use and extend without the risk that enhancements will break the system, that runs nicely out of box and most importunately to support it properly.

Stay tuned.

Update (2006/03/03): We posted a followup that should explain things a bit more.

Posted on: 2007-02-27 5:29

Comments

boldfish

2007-02-27 6:07

will data created in 0.7 branch be easily transferred to the 1.0 branch?

you mention a company for 1.0, does that mean it will no longer be open source?

Maciek

2007-02-27 6:22

Great news!
All the best with your new company – with such product you can’t fail!

toferyu

2007-02-27 6:27

activeCollab 1.0 ? .. summer 2007 ? .... ... goes to change his shorts

But seriously. Sounds like good news all the way for me, I’ll just second that question : Will 0.7 projects easily be imported into 1.0 ?

Chris

Eduardo Mercovich

2007-02-27 6:37

Congratulations for your new company. Everything seems good, but the question about licensing is not a light issue. What license are you thinking about?

Regards…
—Eduardo Mercovich

Peter Gasston

2007-02-27 6:57

Please say that we can import data into 1.0 easily… I’ve spent a lot of time entering data…

Ilija Studen

2007-02-27 7:44

You will not lose your data, don’t worry.

Can’t tell much about licensing, but we will most probably go with something used by profit oriented open source projects (MySQL, SugarCRM…) One thing is for sure – there will be a free and open source version that match current feature set so current users will not be let down when 1.0 gets launched.

Whole point of this transformation is to provide more value to users, not to drive them away. We are aware that some people will now like the idea of profit oriented open source project, but still being able to provide good support, dedicated development team and guaranty that we’ll be here next year is something that we find really important. Hope that most of the users agree with us on that.

Ivan

2007-02-27 8:18

Well Done, Ilja

dobersch

2007-02-27 8:36

Hey Ilija,
just a few thoughts of mine about the latest changes in the aC project development direction:

there will be a free and open source version that match current feature set

Hmmm, OK. I’m wondering if the planned time tracking feature will make it into that version…

What I wouldn’t like seeing activeCollab to become is a crippled version, where all the “gems” are cut out and hidden inside the plugins that aren’t open. Although I respect your goal of earning money and definitely will support you through buying additional products (say plugins, themes, whatever – when useful and needed) I’m a little worried. Please make shure that activeCollab stays a solid base for project management, keep improving it and that the free software product profits from the commercial plans, not the other way around.

I think many users were climbing on the aC bandwagon (through using it, beta testing and offering help and support) because it’s a free alternative to the existing (some of them hosted) solutions that aren’t.

Hope that most of the users agree with us on that.

At least I do…

So rock on dude,
Gabriel

Doug Farnes

2007-02-27 11:54

Great news!

Niko

2007-02-28 3:04

#10

Svaka cast Ilija. Vec nekoliko meseci trazim neko slicno resenje za project management i mogu ti reci, da nemas sta brinut. Ponuda je veoma losa i ako budes stavio neku razumnu cenu, pobedices sigurno.

U firmi sam instalirao activecollab i pokusavamo svu prodajnu dokumentaciju furat ovako. Zasad sve ok, iako nekoliko sitnih stvari fali, siguran sam, da cemo biti spremni za to i nesto platiti.

U ocekivanju 1.0 verzije, pozdrav iz Slovenije!

a.n.other

2007-02-28 7:23

#11

To be honest, I’m just going to move over to basecamp – I was hoping this would be a good replacement but with no new release until summer and questions over the featureset, it’s just not worth the wait and uncertainty.

Vang

2007-02-28 7:38

#12

I think that last guy was right. Besides having some people who are using activecollab for some time now, what other reasons will they have on picking you over basecamp (which is more established and tested) that activecollab took it’s featureset from ?

By the way, good luck with your company, I love seeing independent developers prosper.

lmtsypin

2007-02-28 11:21

#13

I have to agree with the last few line of threads. I prefer open source software to closed solutions like base camp because of the community contributions (to which I like to help), the lack of licensing fees and restrictions, and FREQUENT updates. The path AC is taking seems like it will lack all of these elements.

The current release of AC has WAY too many gaps to not have a release until summer. And it seems there is no development community at all, just one person. Who I might add has done an AMAZING job, but one person a developer community does not make.

mikemanh

2007-02-28 3:37

#14

I have to put in my two cents here:

What I want is an open source piece of software that can be hosted on our machines. I like to use basecamp except for the horribly crippled things that it has done for some users that other users don’t want (and the arbitrary decisions by developers to favor one or the other). If basecamp could somehow be hosted on our machines and let us change those things that we need changed, then I would go with that. It’s a more mature, faster, the UI is easier to use because of its AJAX elements, etc.

I always believed that activecollab would be more than basecamp for the reason that it let its users change what they needed to (Basecamp has API but doesn’t let us modify basecamp). I understand that a developer can get busy on crazy deadlines and the open source hobby they developed can fall to the wayside, and that happens. What I don’t want is for the thing to suddenly lose the extensibility that those of us who were waiting through immature versions have come to expect eventually. I am worried that this company will not let us customize our installations as needed.

Ryan Cross

2007-02-28 5:19

#15

I will also agree with some of the sentiments in the last few comments. I’m disappointed to see aC go in this direction. I think there are way to make money off of opensource software that doesn’t eliminate the community.

@Imtsypin
You can check out the threads in the forum. There are actually several developers that were trying to offer Ilija help and support, but he did not like that idea.

Sammy

2007-02-28 9:06

#16

Isn’t that why you created ActiveCollab? To provide what BaseCamp does but free?

I give you credit and congrats on what you’ve done with AC and your Entrepreneurial interests, but like everyone is saying, why not make money through alternatate means? Maybe tech support, custom themes and plugins? Now I would pay for that and stay loyal to AC. Otherwise, we may as well stick to BaseCamp.

Please reconsider your new route. Either way, best of luck.

Tyler Morgan

2007-02-28 9:36

#17

I’d also like to ask you to reconsider.. if you take this project too commercial, you’re just another Basecamp. Every open source project’s most valuable asset is the developer community – you’re going to kill off the momentum behind this project if you don’t do another release until summer.

Zak

2007-02-28 10:50

#18

I’m sorry to hear about this change. There have been several good open source pm projects that moved to a commercial product. In every case we get to review a “feature comparison” chart that leaves the open source product wanting for true functionality.

For project management and time tracking I’ve been using netoffice-dwins. It’s poorly supported, but functional. Rockyshark (www.waterfallweb.net) is proposing to take on a project to improve netoffice. I like his ideas so far.

I’m not against making money, and more power to you if this product is successful.

Dennison Uy

2007-03-01 1:44

#19

I don’t think Ilija ever mentioned the business strategy for aC so let’s not jump into conclusions such as aC becoming another basecamp shall we?

I have always been a fan of aC and as a BaseCamp user I can say that 0.7 is very comparable to BaseCamp. The only thing that’s keeping me from using it to manage real world projects is the lack of Time Tracking and Reporting functions which to me is the heart of project management. Without it aC is just another todo list. I do still keep an aC installation to manage my freelance projects though. I am very excited and I cannot wait to see the next release. I am planning to eventually drop BaseCamp on our company and switch over to aC when Time Tracking gets implemented. Yeah I know there’s BaseJumpr but I want to use the head branch which Ilija is working on. Go Ilija!

Rick

2007-03-01 10:28

#20

Ilija, as everybody in this discussion, I also think that making money is a good thing, but it is important that in this jump you don’t lose your open source community. If you try to compete head to head with basecamp in terms of functionality you will lose (at least for now) because you won’t have the funds to maintain your development costs. As we all know, costs will scale up as you try to provide a service. Trying to undercut them on price is probably not a great strategy, since this might end up in a price war and they will have the upper end.

Again, these comments are not to discourage you – I personally think a commercial move is a great thing, but you have to make sure your community (who will now become your potential customers) are assured about exactly where you will stand in terms of the functionality of your free version and your pricing strategy. The more you wait to respond, the more people will run away from your product. I think a lot of the posts above are a direct response to the perceived instability

Ben Strackany

2007-03-01 12:21

#21

Honestly Ilija I’m also concerned to read this, because it could turn out well, or turn out badly. But obviously something’s going on to cause this big shift in direction.

I don’t want to jump to conclusions, but it sounds like there are two issues here: 1) you’re closing up the source and closing up the team, and 2) focusing more on making money.

Is #1 an effort to speed up product development and improve stability? If so, there are other ways to do that than by privatizing the development process. And I don’t fault you for wanting #2, but is that partly in order to pay for the dedicated team to pursue #1?

I think the community would like to hear more about the rationale behind the move. You don’t have to, nor do you really “owe” us any kind of explanation, but it would certainly help us feel better about what’s going on.

Lopo Lencastre de Almeida

2007-03-01 5:09

#22

This new model is not the Free Software model at all.

I’m sad to hear that instead of opening the process it is just going backwards.

For almost an year I was waiting for the famous API to be released because (in Ilija words) that will allow us to contribute faster and so I waited (as Ilijia asked us to)... and now this!

Sad, sad…

Going in this direction I predict that a Fork will happen sooner or latter.

Best of lucks, neverthless.

dave caygill

2007-03-01 7:01

#23

Shame. We too were looking forward to getting invoved and contributing to the continued improvemet of the app. Its so important for free software to remain free.

I also suggest the revenue generation element could come from support hosting and customistation services, then you would have the full power of open source development and a way to create an income from it.

If there is enough community and the licence is GPL however there could still be a future in the Open Source version.

What is the planned license?

Is there any one else on the thread that would invest time to see some features in an a more free model? We could potentially contribute some skills (php, html, css, flash)

Thanks,

Dave

dave

Antonio Quirarte

2007-03-01 8:20

#24

Ilja, the world needs you free! (free as in bird).

viceroy321

2007-03-02 1:07

#25

> Is there any one else on the thread that would invest time to see some features in an a more free model? We could potentially contribute some skills (php, html, css, flash)

@dave: mail me at [myusername]@gmail.com

flashlackey

2007-03-02 1:18

#26

Man. What a bunch of whiners. The mere mention that good work might cost something to benefit from causes mass hysteria.

If what people have said is true, that activeCollab has been a substantial benefit to their company, paying for that benefit should be a justified expense. I too will need to see the cost to know if it will work for us. But, I’m definitely willing to pay something for the further development of great software. Am I the only one who uses activeCollab to help sell software to clients for a profit? I somehow doubt that.

All of this talk about “too bad, I would have helped otherwise” is sheer nonsense. If that’s true, why don’t you knights in shining armor go off and spend your hours day after day making your own version that can be eternally free. When you can’t afford the Christmas present your son wants, you can say, “sorry son, Santa was busy with the open source revolution this year.”

The fact is, these guys are doing us a favor by charging for the product. It means that they can justify more attention to it. I think its so good and useful that they could probably justify making a career out of this one product if they wanted to. So, I say, good for you, aC.

Additionally, why is a version in Summer so outrageous? A couple months is too long to wait? This is another example of why opensource development is not always all that its cracked up to be. The people are often times a fickle mob of greedy, unreasonable opportunists who are perfectly willing to insult a proven benefactor at the slightest inconvenience.

Again, good for you aC. I just hope that your cost will be competitve (I suspect it will).

Boston Web Designer

2007-03-02 1:19

#27

This project has never worked very well. I’d say 50% of the links don’t work, and some pieces of the major functionality aren’t in place, or are hidden behind many, many clicks. It’s certainly not usable for actual business practices yet. If anyone has had better luck with the software, then congratulations.

I’ve wanted it to work for about 8 months now, but if the development cycle is slowing down, the cost is rising, there’s not much to show for any of it, and the competitor has a strong market presence with a better value proposition… then what’s the point of focusing on a business model at this stage in the game?

I’d suggest pursuing momentum and attention, getting some test cases through the free distribution and then worrying about making some money once you’ve got an audience and some market penetration…

Plus, you won’t piss or scare all these people off who would more likely be customers after they’ve developed their dependencies.

Well, time to sign up for BaseCamp.

flashlackey

2007-03-02 1:35

#28

ive never had any link not work and haven’t seen any functionality that was hidden. thank you for the congratulations. but, i think i just installed it correctly?

Ilija Studen

2007-03-02 2:59

#29

You raise some pretty important questions in comments, but some of the are completely off because they are based on wrong assumptions. Here they are:

Assumption #1: We will not be able to extend the system

1.0 has been under development for some time now (about a month or so) and it already has plugin support and thanks to RESTful approach the whole application is one big API. Plugins are mini applications that hook into the system (like time tracking, invoicing…) and system provides a great number of hooks that let them handle events thrown by system or other plugins, control the menu and so on. I would dare to say that with 1.0 activeCollab is finally extensible.

Assumption #2: Code will be completely closed

Never said that. Development of core features will be handled by new company, but it does not mean that it will be closed source. Community will be able to write plugins and if plugin proves to be useful to most users it can be included back into the core as long as plugin developer agrees with it. Pretty common practice…

With plugin support in place it is really important to give people something they can learn from. Having code open would help them better understand how system works. That will eventually result in some cool plugins and implementations and that would benefit everyone, including developers. If right business environment is created they can sell their services or simple provide their work as open source. Completely their decision.

Assumption #3: Free version will be so crippled that it will be unusable

Line will be drawn between common features and business features. Unless you need business features free version will do just fine (most home users, non profit organizations and so on will not notice the difference). If you need activeCollab for your business you will be able to develop all the features you need as plugins or to go with Business edition where you get business related plugins developed by us + commercial support for free version and included business plugins.

Assumption #4: We will wait until the summer just to get a version with price tag and nothing new in the system.

If you really think this way you will be really surprised when you see first screenshots ;) Some who don’t know the system will think that its a different application.

Assumption #5: There will be no way to monitor the progress

Beta testing will not be public, but that does not mean that it will be closed. As soon as we get ready for testing public announcement will be made and people will be able to sign for beta testing. It will be done in hosted environment so we can deploy bug fixes and updates more easily. Downside of this decision is that there will be limited number of beta account available.

Also, I plan to blog about how development is progressing. Sound recording hardware and screen capturing software is in place so that should be fun :) Consider it as one new media / software development experiment.
————
I am convinced that this is the best thing to do (preparing a followup post where I’ll explain reasons for this transformation in more details). In the meantime PLEASE, take a look at project like SugarCRM or Expression Engine – software companies with strong focus on community, one embracing open source and other embracing commercial approach. They do just fine and users get the best service.

@Antonio: World needs a cure for cancer and AIDS, solutions for poverty, global warming and rapid growth of human population – we are facing some nasty problems with water and food shortage in the future and so on. World does not need yet another software solution for free, but it does need some refactoring ASAP ;)

anianem

2007-03-02 3:28

#30

I think that SugarCRM have a pretty good business model.

The commercial versions and professional hosting options provided by Sugar appeal to large businesses that would otherwise not even consider an open source model. Obviously this results in a decent income stream for the developers and the project.

The open source version is also fairly feature rich, and anything that doesn’t come as stock is generally available from the SugarExchange. The open source licence isn’t too restrictive and you can sell hosted versions of it etc.

But Ilija shouldn’t forget that SugarCRM started out as a open source project, built up a significant community and then finally decided to start offering commercial versions. I’m worried that activeCollab is no where near as polished as Sugar and I question whether business would actually pay decent money for it in its current guise. Also by going commercial too early you run the risk of alienating the community which would be a real shame and could put the project into jeopardy.

anianem

2007-03-02 3:29

#31

From the SugarCRM website

“The first users of SugarCRM software were the open source community. We would not be the company we are today without the comments, suggestions, and contribution of the open source community. SugarCRM, Inc. is committed to continue to provide product enhancements to Sugar Open Source and will continue to depend on the open source community for online development, community contributions, bug alerts, language packs, open source extensions, and product direction. Our contributors are from around the world, building components based on their businesses needs, and they contribute these components back to the project to the benefit of all.”

If activeCollab follows this path then I have no doubt it will be a great success.

Martin

2007-03-02 7:31

#32

Hi Ilija,

well, not sure what to think about that. First i have to say that i am looking forward to the changes. But i have also a bitter taste in the mouth. The point i don´t want to use basecamp is not that i don´t want to pay for the application. For me the main reason is, that i want to host it on my own server. I have absolutly no problem with paying for a good application as long as i can host it on my own server there i have control about security, have my own domain and so on. And that monthly fees is another thing i don´t like. I want an app, so i pay for it and i own something. With the hosted stuff i pay for traffic and webspace i already have and pay (including my own domain) and an app i am only allowed to use. I am quite old fashioned in that kind of stuff. :)

Hope you don´t decide for an hosted only version. What would kill the idea of the project i think.

greetings

Martin

Ilija Studen

2007-03-02 7:50

#33

Installable version will be available, of course.

Only beta testing will be done in hosted environment. Usually process for installable software – pack a release, release it, support upgrade and installation, wait for new features and bug fixes to accumulate, pack another release, release it, wait for people who upgrade their installation just two weeks ago to finally find time to download new version and install it, provide support to people who are upgrading, see how it works… Repeat! Too much overhead.

Being able to fix problem as soon as someone reports it and roll out new features to testers as soon as they are stable for testing is great advantage of hosted environment so we decided to go with that. It will save us time and I bet that some testers will like to see bugs they reported fixed as soon as possible.

Daniele Mazzini

2007-03-02 9:06

#34

Hi

I have a suggestion for Ilija: you should post a new blog message explaining that there will be an installable version, that code will still be open source, and clarifying everything else that was worrying to many users. For us, if we can install the commercial version of Ac on our server, it can still be an option, but that wasn’t at all clear at first.

Good luck

Dan

vkimball

2007-03-02 12:41

#35

There have been several “open source, closed development” projects. Some are successful, some are not.

Good luck, Ilija.

We’ll just have to wait and see what happens.

David

2007-03-02 2:47

#36

The moment I got involved with working on a SugarCRM / Asterisk project is when I finally understood how open source could be a viable business model while still keeping true to “open source” if handled correctly. Anyone that is complaining that this application is going in that direction should take a moment and check out Sugar and apps like it.

Congratulations on the new business and I look forward for the new version!

...How do I get on the beta program?

Adam

2007-03-03 10:54

#37

If you don’t like the new terms, there is nothing stopping anyone from forking the current application and developing it as its own project while continuing to offer it under the more liberal GPL terms.

openCollab anyone?

AmO

2007-03-04 4:05

#38

It is a choice… maybe not the good.

Good luck for suite !

A similar product: http: // www.copperproject.com/

chuck

2007-03-05 3:17

#39

Good plan. Lots of opensource/commercial support models out there. Good luck!

Be sure to keep the OS stuff chugging along it will save your ass in the end :-D

Would like to see an approach to integration of the app into other website (Atom, etc). you’ll get lots of interest with that.

Cheers!

TheDave

2007-03-08 3:33

#40

I would like to congratulate Ilija on making his project as mature as it has become. A valiant effort.

I would like to comment on what many have suggested in this thread as “time to move to Basecamp”: Basecamp remotely is hosted. activeCollab is not. Those who understand the significance will likely be activeCollab customers in the future. Those that do not see the significance, are probably better served by basecamp. That is cool. I am not flaming basecamp. Future activeCollab customers will be of a different stock and have different needs.

I would like to suggest that many of the features and functions I have seen requested, although good suggestions, are not necessarily good for the form and function of aC. Ilija has managed the flow and scope of this project with admirable forethought and skill. There are many things we all would have done differently but probably not as well.

Would I like to see time tracking? Hell yeah! Is being able to issue a billing statement more important than having the well executed collaborative workspace that ac offers for free? Well, I would say “no”. Is Ilija entitled to do what he wants with his code including offering it commercially? Absolutely. Am I entitled to take the 0.7.1 release and use it as the foundation of a super-secret space program? According to the rules, I guess I am.

Thanks for that.

Mark

2007-03-14 2:42

#41

Congratulations, Ilja. ActiveCollab is a great tool and I know that there will be a strong market for it. Having said that, I hope that a comprehensive open-source version will still be available – one with the current features at the minimum.

Does your focus on 1.0 mean that outstanding issues such as the large file issue (Ticket #254) are not on the radar for being fixed? I had abandoned other online services for ActiveCollab and have been unable to fully integrate it into my environment as a result of the issue.

Thanks,
Mark

Elliot

2007-03-16 3:14

#42

Re: sugarcrm….

Vtiger is a perfect example of what can happen with project licensing schemes change.

lxs

2007-03-19 10:23

#43

will be developed exclusively by company that I started

Witch licence will you use ?

vincenzobar

2007-03-26 10:29

#44

are you going to make me move to dotproject????

Gary

2007-03-30 7:02

#45

Free and commercial versions are very common, why all the whining. I use Weblog Expert for web analysis. There are many web log analysis tools out there for free, including Weblog Expert Lite, but I my employer was willing to pay for the full version because of the added feature set.

I think people need to relax and let Ilja’s plan take shape. A free open source version that covers basic needs and a commercial version that covers advanced needs sounds reasonable.

mike

2007-04-02 7:48

#46

It would be a pity if you would give up the GPL.

Then hopefully someone picks up the 0.x branch!

What I want is a free aC. Not free as in beer (if you want money), but free as GPL licensed…

So you can have my money, but than give me the code so I can hack it on!

projman

2007-05-01 2:04

#47

Mike, I’m going to try to keep the 0.x branch alive for people like you and I over at projectpier.org.

Coach Culbertson

2007-05-03 12:17

#48

Well, I for one am with you all the way, boys and girls. I love activeCollab, and since our staff all work remotely, it’s a great way to keep everything up and moving. Can’t wait to see the next version!

Guillaume Belanger

2007-05-11 10:57

#49

Please keep up the good work, this is one project management tool that just seems right.

I think the commercial/free license duality can be managed, but you guys need to be smart about it. Feature crippling is not always a good idea.

I’ve seen many ‘open-source’ based software distributors use the Community Edition/Enterprise edition paradigm, which uses either the commercial focus or the number of supported users as the bracket between the free and commercial edition.

Scalix, in my opinion, is a successful implementation of that.

Other bigger players, like MySQL and Apache, rely on their capacity to provide ‘official’ support for their platform. However, this is probably a harder target if you want to get the SMB market – they won’t pay unless they have to =)

In any case: Great work –

Comments are locked

If you have something important to say about the issues discussed in this post please write at hi@a51dev.com.

Comments

Comments are locked

News and Announcements

Developer Blog

Company Blog

activeCollab Blog Archive

About

Licensing

Support

Already have an account? Login

New to this site? Register