[SOLVED] Missing thirdparty directory in souce tarballs

[dijichi2]

Hi

The 5.0b2 source seems to be missing ThirdParty, necessary because of the very specific way Zimbra compiles and configures these components. Is there somewhere to get it?

[dijichi2]

Quite apart from making it extremely difficult for anyone to actually build Zimbra from source, is this not a blatent violation of GPL?

[JoshuaPrismon]

Originally Posted by dijichi2

Quite apart from making it extremely difficult for anyone to actually build Zimbra from source, is this not a blatent violation of GPL?

No. It's not ;-)

You can build the source without this particular directory.(I have it running on my DEV box). The configuration files exist in the production build if you want the config files.

[dijichi2]

No. It's not ;-)

You can build the source without this particular directory.(I have it running on my DEV box). The configuration files exist in the production build if you want the config files.

But Zimbra is distributing GPL software along with it's commercial product (and its 'opensource' product which is not compatible with GPL), in some cases this software is modified. I was under impression you have to distribute full source as well as modifications.

It's a pretty sad situation when we have to grasp at straws in order to try and get the basic source to compile from.

[JoshuaPrismon]

Originally Posted by dijichi2

But Zimbra is distributing GPL software along with it's commercial product (and its 'opensource' product which is not compatible with GPL), in some cases this software is modified. I was under impression you have to distribute full source as well as modifications.

It's a pretty sad situation when we have to grasp at straws in order to try and get the basic source to compile from.

Actually, it's been a bit of the reverse I think. Because of the licensing mess that is the Open Source world, I think the Zimbra guys have had problems distributing their full dist. All that being said, AFAIK, all software that is required to be out there is. (Note: I don't work for Zimbra, and a bit of a open source zealot myself, so this is not a area I am inclined to give anyone a pass at).

How difficult it is to get the source working is a factor, as is the learning curve behind the Zimlet and ZWC architectures. Zimbra folk have said in the past that they want to work on it to make it easier to distribute (and frankly, with OpenExchange and Scalix both going OpenSource, that might be a good idea) and I have no reason to doubt them.

[dijichi2]

You can build the source without this particular directory.(I have it running on my DEV box). The configuration files exist in the production build if you want the config files.

It might be possible but it will be as much use as a chocolate teapot.

Actually, it's been a bit of the reverse I think. Because of the licensing mess that is the Open Source world, I think the Zimbra guys have had problems distributing their full dist. All that being said, AFAIK, all software that is required to be out there is. (Note: I don't work for Zimbra, and a bit of a open source zealot myself, so this is not a area I am inclined to give anyone a pass at).

You're misunderstanding the point of the GPL - it's to protect other GPL works, not Zimbra. If Zimbra modifies and/or distributes GPL software (which it does), it must also distribute the source code and those modifications (which it doesn't). It might well say that the ancient broken svn tree fulfills that criteria, but without updated source how do we know? To be honest I don't give a toss about this issue, I just want Zimbra to release the ThirdParty directory (and svn tree) so we can carry on with our futile attempts to contribute.

How difficult it is to get the source working is a factor, as is the learning curve behind the Zimlet and ZWC architectures. Zimbra folk have said in the past that they want to work on it to make it easier to distribute (and frankly, with OpenExchange and Scalix both going OpenSource, that might be a good idea) and I have no reason to doubt them.

I don't doubt them either, but they've been saying this for months and nothing is appearing. The fact remains we only have occasional tarball drops, a partial, outdated, read-only svn sync of their internal source tree, and of course no access to the internal source tree. This is extraordinary for an opensource project, especially one that has used community contributions as a marketing point.

[KevinH]

Thanks for your patient guys. Our intention is to release a source tree(and we do this with each release to sf.net). The attempt to convert from Perforce (or internal source) to SVN/CVS earlier never really worked well. As you know it broke down and wasn't a perfect mirror. The way SVN and Perforce handle certain things like integrations made it a pretty manual process when it got out of sync each week.

So we've been working with Perforce to offer a direct mirror/cache of our internal source tree. That has now been approved. So what is left is to setup the cache and enable it. This has been delayed as we are in the middle of a data center move. Since nobody hosts Perforce we need to host this cache ourselves. Not a problem but as we are moving to a new data center we can't add a new box until the new data center is online. Firewalls and network is up in the new data center. First boxes will be moved early next week. We hope to have the Perforce cache up in the week or so following that.

[hillman]

The beta3 source release is out - that's great news. Unfortunately, still no info on how to build the Third Party packages. Most of the package 'configure' options can be guessed by viewing the old 4.5.x SVN tree, but the new packages can't. Can anyone from Zimbra supply the 'configure' options (if any) that were used for the packages that are new to 5.0:

- Jetty
- Apache 2.2
- Memcached
- NGINX (source version is "0.5.20-zimbra", so does that mean Zimbra has modified the source code?)

Thanks!
(P.S, I hope that updated SVN tree is imminent )

[dijichi2]

Hi Kevin

Thanks for sharing that info with us outside of the company. Look forward to getting the source tree back. As others have pointed out, the current release source tarballs are incomplete and missing vital bits needed to build. Hopefully more of us can contribute back to Zimbra when this happens.

[quanah]

I've created a tarball of the 3rd party source tree that we use, and pushed it to sourceforge, which includes our local patches., find it here:

SourceForge.net: Files

I'll note that although several people have mentioned the GPL, I believe (but haven't fully checked) that all the software is licensed by other means, mostly the BSD style licenses: Wikipedia entry here: BSD licenses - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

--Quanah