X
Tech

Jitterbit goes open source

The driving force is we hear the community and companies who want to go open source have issues with the GPL. They don’t like the viral aspect. They believe they should own their enhancements. With this license they are protected.
Written by Dana Blankenhorn, Inactive

Jitterbit, which makes software tieing applications together, is going open source under the Mozilla public license, slightly modified to protect the trademark.

jitterbit.jpg
Two versions are being offered, a free community edition and a $9,995/server/year (for support) professional edition. I asked CEO Sharam Sasson why he didn't just go GPL. "The driving force is we hear the community and companies who want to go open source have issues with the GPL. They don’t like the viral aspect. They believe they should own their enhancements. With this license they are protected.

"To us it would not matter. Just to be more sensitive to our customers."

Sasson, who said he previously helped found two enterprise software outfits, calls this a "dual license" strategy. "We also go beyond what most open source projects do. Typically the community offers feature requests, bug reports and some code contributions. We’re allowing the community to contribute complete projects. We call these JitterPaks," defined as consumable XML documents that encapsulate all aspects of a pre-defined Jitterbit integration.

Jitterbit is also partnering with OpenMFG, which creates ERP solutions using open source. That has already brought dividends in the shape of a customer. The Marena Group of Lawrenceville, Georgia.

Where from here? "We’ve done some work with SugarCRM. Personally I believe the open source companies can deliver a more complete solution. We’ve also invested in web services technology. We integrate with Salesforce.com, and Amazon.com, which we put out as Jitterpaks. But we’re trying to go beyond that in terms of integration. We do more than data integration. We integrate between apps and over the web using web services."

Glue, in other words.

Editorial standards