Zentyal Forum, Linux Small Business Server
Zentyal Server => Installation and Upgrades => Topic started by: nuanda on June 30, 2008, 03:17:11 pm
-
I think It could be wonderfull to integrate a groupware server in eBox.
The best solution for me could be SoGO (http://sogo.opengroupware.org/).
It use LDAP for authentication and PostgreSQL for data managment.
I find a script made by Mark Pavlichuk, for installation on Ubuntu and it is self documented:
http://mail.opengroupware.org/pipermail/sogo/2008-May/001000.html
-
Is there anymore interest in SOGo?
From the testing we have done I have to say that the SOGo/Thunderbird combination is the best replacement for Exchange/Outlook.
It would be great to have it as a plugin for eBox.
Kevin
-
Hello,
We currently give support to this groupware solution (eGroupware: http://egroupware.org) since it was the most demanded one.
Is there any reason to use SOGo instead of eGroupware?
Best regards,
-
Yes,
Most users have been exposed to the functionality of Outlook with Exchange and thus are not satisfied with reduced performance or features when using a replacement package.
eGroupware provides a tremendous feature package but only with its web interface and this is limited to the limitations of the browser (customized spell checking, etc.).
Most users are satisfied with the Thunderbird email client features. eGroupware allows a synchronization with Thunderbird's calendar and contacts via funambol and some others but they require complicated setup for the end user and can have limited functionality (the Funambol plug-in only allows one calendar and address book to be sync'd).
SOGo provides a Thunderbird plug-in that allows the administrator to install and remove plug-ins and set configurations on the server and then push them out to all the Thunderbird clients.
Any address books or calendars that the user creates in either client (webmail or Thunderbird) is replicated in the other client. If a user adds six address books and four calendars in Thunderbird they are immediately available in the webmail client without the user having to perform any additional steps.
The address books and calendars and email folders (this may require a Cyrus IMAP server) can be shared with other users with varying degrees of permission with true ACL functionality.
The SOGo webmail interface mimics Thunderbird's interface so users will be comfortable and familiar with either client (similar to how the Exchange webmail interface mimics the appearance of Outlook).
-
This would be a great addon.
+1 to get into ebox
-
+1 (and bump topic :) just to avoid loss)
Is there any reason to use SOGo instead of eGroupware?
Sure! In many cases a SoGo feature set fits completely into a "small office" needs (mail, shared mail, shared dox, calendar).
At the same time an eGroupware too overbloated with a many rare used bells an whistles (in a full install it can replace abt 3/4 of an eBox functions, even a samba, samba-users, ldap etc.)
-
This would be a great addon.
+1 to get into ebox
SOGo is great
-
Having had a play with the demo I've got to say that it does look very good!
I don't think it's really comparable to egroupware. Sogo just seems to do the basics that every office needs while egroupware does a whole bunch of stuff the very few people need.
I've shown egroupware to a couple of business who've rejected it purely on the grounds of looks without even considering whether it would do what they need. That said I don't think it really would have suited them very well. Though that's another problem with egroupware, it seems pretty focused on doing all the functions a team of software developers would need. Thing is that doesn't fit a large number of people.
An alternative basic groupware package would be very nice to have.
-
Something that might be nice would be Tine 2.0, which is a pretty good groupware that's steadily improving. It doesn't support sync other than ActiveSync at the moment, though.
On the other hand, the AJAX webui is fantastic. :)
-
From a users standpoint, I think it should be something that *really* works. In eGW there is the wiki, but I for my part don't know how to create a new page there.
Other thing is the leg-breaking syncronisation to mobile devices. This is what it makes a different in a (small) business environment. To be honest, I'd rather pay for a working solution than live with a free, buggy one....
I havent tested SoGo with mobile sync so far, if anybody has test-experience, please let me know.
There is Kolab and open-xchange as an alternative to eGW out there.
-
I am getting ready to play around with ebox for the first time, but thought i'd chime in on experiences with "M$ Exchange" like packages.
Zimbra Collaboration Server should be added to the lists of considerations as well. I have it install in another Linux environment and have nothing but goo things to say about its functionality.
Yes, it is an open source email server.
I have installed on Hardy, Karmic, as well as Lucid without any issues.
Have a look at it and see if it's a package worthy of discussion and inclusion here as well. I certainly think it is.
http://www.zimbra.com (http://www.zimbra.com)
-
I think the problem with Zimbra is that it would have the core around which the rest of ebox was written rather than being an optional module you could have if you want it. That's if you wanted Zimbra to work with all its bells and whistles.
-
I have used egroupware for several years and it was the inclusion of this in ebox that brought me here. I chose it over ogo 3 or 4 years ago because it had more features and because I was able to get it to work. With ogo, that was not the case then. Concerns that it has more features than some need should be disregarded as those extra features can be ignored if not needed but are of use to some of us. Mark me down as supporting the continued inclusion of egroupware in ebox.
-
I think the decision the eBox developers face is whether they want eBox to be a total, turnkey small business solution or a core services small business solution. In the first case, a product like eGroupWare makes the most sense. In the second case, it might not.
Anyone who has agreed with Bill Gates' "corporate IQ" argument in his Business @ The Speed Of Thought: Using A Digital Nervous System will see the value potential of eGroupWare to a turnkey solution. Using Gates' terminology, even small businesses have "history and traditions," and "modern organizations need a...way to record and pass on their folklore" (pp 236, 237). In my organization, we are using eGroupWare in exactly the way Gates envisions, as a shared corporate knowledge storehouse.
On the other hand, if eBox is essentially an infrastructure product and not a turnkey solution, then it makes sense (to me) to look at tools that focus on infrastructure-related requirements. But that should be across the board, not just in the groupware space. It makes less sense (to me) to have items like web-mail and a "user corner" in an infrastructure product. Ease of productivity product integration into the infrastructure would be a more sensible priority.
That said, the way-less-than-friendly process of syncing mobile devices to eGroupWare is a major liability. Small businesses not using Exchange may still be in the habit of syncing with Outlook for personal productivity. In my case, where the organization doesn't provide a mobile device, people using their personal mobile device have to do their calendars twice, since the alternative--officially supporting these devices--is not attractive enough to the organization, given the pain and uncertainty involved.
-
I just want to get my vote in for Zimbra. It's the closest I've seen to an Exchange replacement and the only thing it's missing is seamless integration into directory services (which eBox does well) for single point of authentication. IMO, eBox and Zimbra could be the ultimate server for small businesses.
EB
-
Sam,
I think you are touching something important here.
What is Zentyal? From what I have seen so far, the focus is supposed to be on "Small business server", but lately there has been a lot about Zentyal as a router and firewall.
In my book, those two things can not exist on the same physical system. So I have never used eBox/Zentyal as a gateway or router. I prefer other, dedicated, systems for that.
I have been using eBox/Zentyal as a workgroup server with file sharing, printersharing as well as some other functions not managed by eBox/Zentyal (apt-cacher ng etc.)
One question - is the community version of eGroupWare still being maintained by the company behind it? Is there a Ubuntu version available? Are bugs being fixed?
As far as I know, this has been the arguments for dropping eGroupWare. There has now been a message about Zarafa and the first release of a Zarafa module has been done.
I do not think this totally closes the door for other solutions, but right now, Zarafa is the chosen product.
-
In my book, those two things can not exist on the same physical system. So I have never used eBox/Zentyal as a gateway or router. I prefer other, dedicated, systems for that.
Zentyal is completely modular, what's the problem in having two Zentyal machines, one as office server and another as a gateway?
We are always trying to improve our product, so please, if you see important features on the other dedicated products that we are missing, let us know ;)
-
In my book, those two things can not exist on the same physical system. So I have never used eBox/Zentyal as a gateway or router. I prefer other, dedicated, systems for that.
Zentyal is completely modular, what's the problem in having two Zentyal machines, one as office server and another as a gateway?
My view is similar to that expressed by Oceanwatcher
What is Zentyal? From what I have seen so far, the focus is supposed to be on "Small business server", but lately there has been a lot about Zentyal as a router and firewall.
This will see it being used in the Small-Medium-Enterprize (SME), Small-Office-Home-Office (SOHO), and also I suggest as a family server (FS) in a purely domestic environment.
In many of these cases Zentyal will not be introduced to a green field site. Each location is likely to have an existing internet connection and a range of hardware. High on the list of requirements is normally a demand to minimize capital outlay (redeployment of equipment) and running costs (energy consumption, subscriptions etc).
Internet Connectivity is often provided via multi-function broadband routers which are commonplace and inexpensive in a Windows environment.
Commonly provided functions include:
- Remote management
- IP address allocation
- Status monitoring and reporting
- Device backup
- Regular firmware upgrades
- Quality of Service
- NAT
- Firewall
- Access control/Filtering
- Dynamic DNS
- Port Forwarding
- Demilitarized Zone
- Wireless/Wired connections
- Integrated high speed switches
These devices also consume less power than a dedicated server machine. They are usually physically smaller than a server machine and therefore easy to accommodate. An existing Windows site is likely to have a suitable device which is adequately fulfilling the needs of the user/organization. Additionally it is already known how to manage the device and therefore the learning curve of a replacement Zentyal box is eliminated. Combine with this a history of device reliability (otherwise the device would have been abandoned) and the exposure to non Quality Assured Updates is reduced with a consequent reduction in recurrent costs.
-
I, on the other hand, tend to see things as J. A. Calvo sees them. And I have yet to see a commodity router do what Zentyal does, and does better even where there is overlap.
I tried VPN using commodity hardware in a Windows shop. The fact that all that commodity hardware is now in storage speaks for itself, especially given the fact that I am very much a GNU/Linux n00b. :)
And robust HTTP content filtering and virus scanning on a consumer box? I've not seen anything in commodity hardware that comes even close to the power and flexibility that the eBox proxy implementation offered (haven't managed to play with Zentyal yet :( ). For those of us who need reliable, robust content filtering for accountability and security purposes, the commodity market has nothing serious enough, to my knowledge, to qualify.
And what commodity router throws a chat server in for good measure? :D
I was drawn to eBox in a small business environment because it was an attractive alternative to costlier network appliances. It had virtually no groupware capability in those days, so that wasn't the draw. As it was included, it was frosting on the cake.
Today, I would deploy Zentyal as a stand-alone groupware server if it had the type of fully integrated knowledge worker support I want. I get the focus on e-mail, contacts, calendars, and easy synchronization, but that's simply too narrow a focus, IMHO, in the SMB market. Integrated knoweldge tools are not the same thing as integrated communication tools. SMBs that are already using the cloud--and many of them do--for what Zentyal 2.0 offers in the groupware market will have little incentive to change. SMBs that have Web hosting are in about the same place.
So in my real world situation, and in my real world advocacy of Zentyal as an SMB/non-proft solution, the robust infrastructure offerings are easily the draw. I can't afford, long term, to entrust either my knowledge worker tools or my communication tools to open source solutions unless I have reliablity, continuity, and recovery in the can. eBox didn't deliver that, and Zentyal isn't heading that direction. But single-handedly, Zentyal puts significant infrastructure capability into the hands of SMBs with cost-effective options, stuff that would cost much more as standard network appliances even if built on top of a commodity hardware infrastructure.
This all becomes especially important as the distinction between community Zentyal and professional Zentyal becomes more defined, I think. It will be interesting to see how that plays out both within and outside the Zentyal community.
All just my own 2 cents, of course.
-
I, on the other hand...
[...]
All just my own 2 cents, of course.
Good cogent stuff as usual, Sam.
I have never needed or used the groupware functions provided by eBox. I interpreted the view of Oceanwatcher I mentioned as widening the discussion on thread title of "Groupware server for eBox". If this is not the case the comments are perhaps wandering off topic and may be better moved to a different thread.
There was a time when I also required deployments to be as bullet-proof as you describe. This is no longer the case and lower levels of certainty have become acceptable. Responding to the question from J. A. Calvo from this perspective was meant to indicate that alternatives to a chain of eBoxes (Zentyals?) can be a valid and appropriate choice depending upon the requirements of the site in question. Perhaps the point should have more clearly expressed to indicate that it was not a question of relative merits but an illustration of some of the reasons that might underpin a choice.
I also have been unable to investigate/test the forthcoming release; hopefully this will change soon but unfortunately not before the release date.
As we don't use cents in Great Britain would you accept 2 new pence?
-
What is Zentyal? From what I have seen so far, the focus is supposed to be on "Small business server", but lately there has been a lot about Zentyal as a router and firewall.
Actually, the focus of Zentyal/eBox is:
"Manage all your computer network services through one single platform. [...] All services based on the same technology and fully integrated".
Say, "Linux Small Business Server" doesn't exclude security/gateway neither office capabilities (e.g. groupware). *All* a SMB requires, deployed and managed in a simple and easy way, ruled by a single technology/UI and integrated. That's our value offering and our differentiation against best-of-breed/specific solutions.
On the other hand, it doesn't imply to have all the services on the same physical/virtual machine. We usually recommend to separate Gateway/FW from Office, whether physical or virtual.
-
As we don't use cents in Great Britain would you accept 2 new pence?
I'm pretty sure that US pennies devalue the raw materials, so I'm guessing that my 2 cents worth most likely isn't worth 2 pence.
Since you've been pretty rare around here for a while, if you can just manage to post now and again so that I have things to think about, we can leave currency out of it and I'll consider myself coming out well ahead on the deal. :D
But back on topic, or at least more on topic, I am reading Oceanwatcher as saying that the real value-added part of Zentyal as a SaaS product is in Exchange-type capability. And his comments follow sensibly the question I had raised earlier.
But my own opinion is what I was trying to get across. SMBs with small staff but high requirements or SMBs with multiple locations (including road warrior and home office scenarios) are opportunities for both professional and community Zentyal as a turn-key infrastructure solution. I'm not trying to minimize the office offerings, but I remain unconvinced that Zentyal can or will truly integrate communications and knowledge worker tools into it's front end in the foreseeable future. In other words, by focusing on Exchange-type functionality, Zentyal comes closer to achieving a solid product sooner but at the expense of knowledge-building tools, where an SMB interested in such things needs the most help.
So in my case, Zentyal cannot be my sole solution. In the case of SMBs and non-profits where I can advocate solutions, Zentyal likely cannot be the sole solution. However it plays out, knowledge worker tools will have to be added and managed independently, as they are for the most part at present. These would benefit by being treating as part of a groupware solution at the front end, regardless of how it all looks at the back end, but Zentyal has reversed the course eBox tentatively set, even if only in the short term and for excellent practical reasons. For similarly excellent practical reasons, Zentyal adopters interested in growing knowledge worker solutions will develop the habit of deploying Zentyal and _______. Fill in the blank with anyone's preferred approach to integration and deployment.
I have an uber-geek friend who wants to build a cloud infrastructure for knowledge workers in the SMB and non-profit markets, and even though I'm not keen on the public cloud, we are in discussion. That's clearly off-topic here, but it does point out that there are people out here that are thinking about integrated knowledge worker solutions. That's the connection to Zentyal as a groupware server in the sense that I use that term, where communications and knowledge building are fully equal partners and where, conceivably, Zentyal, some day, could be the tool of choice for internal and external cloud-based SMB knowledge worker solutions.
-
I prepared a long answer here, but realised it is going too far from the original topic of the discussion. I am going to open a new topic for discussion of a more general kind.
But in short - I agree with Sam Graf that Zentyal needs to be more than just an Exchange replacement. And this is why I have suggested other additions like MindTouch (testing it as we speak).
-
If one of the criteria for inclusion is existence in the Ubuntu repositories, are we in any better shape with MindTouch? I'm finding only instructions for ading the MindTouch repository, but then, I'm not at an Ubuntu box where I can look for myself. :)