JBossESB  4.2

• Generic section

  Generic criteria from QSOS version 1.6

  • Intrinsic durability
    • Maturity
      • Age
        • less than 3 months
        • if between 3 months and 3 years
        • after 3 years

        Score : 1/2
      • Stability
        • Unstable software with numerous releases or patches generating side effects
        • Stabilized production release existing but old. Difficulties to stabilize developpement releases
        • Stabilized software. Releases provide bug fixes corrections but mainly new functionalities

        Score : 1/2
      • History, known problems
        • Software knows several problems which can be prohibitive
        • No know major problem or crisis
        • History of good management of crisis situations

        Score : 1/2
      • Fork probability, source of Forking
        • Software is very likely to be forked in the future
        • Software comes from a fork but has very few chances of being forked in the future
        • Software has very little chance of being forked. It does not come from a fork either

        Score : 1/2
    • Adoption
      • Popularity (related to: general public, niche, ...)
        • Very few users identified
        • Detectable use on Internet
        • Numerous users, numerous references

        Score : 1/2
      • References
        • None
        • Few refences, non critical usages
        • Often implemented for critical applications

        Score : 1/2
      • Contributing Community
        • No community or without real activity (forum, mailing list, ...)
        • Existing community with a notable activity
        • Strong community: big activity on forums, numerous contributors and advocates

        Score : 2/2
      • books
        • No book about the software
        • Less than 5 books about the software are available
        • More than 5 books about software are available, in several languages

        Score : 0/2
    • Development leadership
      • Leading team
        • 1 to 2 individuals involved, not clearly identified
        • Between 2 and 5 independent people
        • More than 5 people

        Score : 2/2
      • Management style
        • Complete dictatorship
        • Enlightened despotism
        • Council of architects with identified leader (e.g: KDE)

        Score : 1/2
    • Activity
      • Developers, identification, turnover
        • Less than 3 developers, not clearly identified
        • Between 4 and 7 developers, or more unidentified developers with important turnover
        • More than 7 developers, very stable team

        Score : 2/2
      • Activity on bugs
        • Slow reactivity in forum or on mailing list, or nothing regarding bug fixes in releases note
        • Detectable activity but without process clearly exposed, loing reaction/resolution time
        • Strong reactivity based on roles and tasks assignment

        Score : 2/2
      • Activity on functionalities
        • No or few new functionalities
        • Evolution of the product driven by the core team or by user's request without any clearly explained process
        • Tool(s) to manage feature requests, strong interaction with roadmap

        Score : 1/2
      • Activity on releases
        • Very weak activity on both production and development releases
        • Activity on production and developmenet releases. Frequent minor releases (bug fixes)
        • Important activity with frequent minor releases (bugs fixes) and planned major releases relating to the roadmap forcast

        Score : 2/2
  • Industrialized solution
    • Independence of developments
      • Developments realized at 100% by employees of a single company
      • 60% maximum
      • 20% maximum

      Score : 1/2
    • Services
      • Training
        • No offer of training identified
        • Offer exists but is restricted geographically and to one language or is provided by a single contractor
        • Rich offers provided by several contractors, in serveral languages and split into modules of gradual levels

        Score : 0/2
      • Support
        • No offer of support except via public forums and mailing lists
        • Offer exists but is provided by a single contractor without strong commitment quality of services
        • Multiple service providers with strong commitment (e.g: guaranteed resolution time)

        Score : 0/2
      • Consulting
        • No offer of consulting service
        • Offer exists but is restricted geographically and to one language or is provided by a single contractor
        • Consulting services provided by different contractors in serveral languages

        Score : 0/2
    • Documentation
      • No user documentation
      • Documentation exists but shifted in time, is restricted to one language or is poorly detailed
      • Documentation always up to date, translated and possibly adapted to different target readers (end user, sysadmin, manager, ...)

      Score : 1/2
    • Quality Assurance
      • Quality Assurance
        • No QA process
        • Identifies QA process but not much formalized and with no tool
        • Automatic testing process included in code's life-cycle with publication of results

        Score : 1/2
      • Tools
        • No bug or feature request management tool
        • Standard tools provided (for instance by a hosting forge) but poorly used
        • Very active use of tools for roles/tasks allocation and progress monitoring

        Score : 0/2
    • Packaging
      • Source
        • Software can't be installed from source without lot of work
        • Installation from source is limited and depends on very strict conditions (OS, arch, lib, ...)
        • Installation from source is easy

        Score : 2/2
      • Debian
        • The software is not packaged for Debian
        • A Debian package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • The software is packaged in the distribution

        Score : 0/2
      • FreeBSD
        • The software is not packaged for FreeBSD
        • A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • A official port exists in FreeBSD

        Score : 0/2
      • HP-UX
        • The software is not packaged for HP-UX
        • A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • A stable package is provided for HP-UX

        Score : 0/2
      • MacOSX
        • The software is not packaged for MacOSX
        • A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • The software is packaged in the distribution

        Score : 2/2
      • Mandriva
        • The software is not packaged for Mandriva
        • A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • The software is packaged in the distribution

        Score : 0/2
      • NetBSD
        • The software is not packaged for NetBSD
        • A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • A official port exists in NetBSD

        Score : 0/2
      • OpenBSD
        • The software is not packaged for OpenBSD
        • A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • A official port exists in OpenBSD

        Score : 0/2
      • RedHat
        • The software is not packaged for RedHat/Fedora
        • A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • The software is packaged in the distribution

        Score : 2/2
      • Solaris
        • The software is not packaged for Solaris
        • A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support (e.g: SunFreeware.com )
        • The software is supported by Sun for Solaris

        Score : 0/2
      • SuSE
        • The software is not packaged for SuSE
        • A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support
        • The software is packaged in the distribution

        Score : 0/2
      • Windows
        • The project can't be installed on Windows
        • A package exists but it is limited or has important issues or just cover some specific Windows release (e.g: Windows2000 and WindowsXP)
        • Windows is full supported and a package is provided

        Score : 2/2
  • Exploitability
    • Ease of use, ergonomics
      • Difficult to use, requires an in depth knowledge of the software functionality
      • Austere and very technical ergonomics
      • GUI including help functions and elaborated ergonomics

      Score : 1/2
    • Administration / Monitoring
      • No administrative or monitoring functionalities
      • Existing, functionalities but uncomplete and or need improvement
      • Complete and easy-to-use administration and monitoring functionalities. Possible integration with external tools (e.g: SNMP, syslog, ...)

      Score : 1/2
  • Technical adaptability
    • Modularity
      • Monolithic software
      • Presence of hight level modules allowing a first level of software adaptation
      • Modular conception, allowing easy adaptation of the software by selecting or creating modules

      Score : 1/2
    • Code modification
      • Everything by hand
      • Recompilation possible but complex without any tools or documentation
      • Recompilation with tools (e.g: make, ANT, ...) and documentation provided

      Score : 0/2
    • Code extension
      • Any modification requires code recompilation
      • Architecture designed for static extension but requires recompilation
      • Principle of plugin, architecture designed for dynamic extension without recompilation

      Score : 2/2
  • Strategy
    • License
      • Permissiveness (only if user wants to become owner of code)
        • Very strict license, like GPL
        • Moderate permissive license located between both extremes (GPL and BSD) dual-licensing depending on the type of user (person, company, ...) or their activities
        • Very permissive like BSD or Apache licenses

        Score : 2/2
      • Protection against proprietary forks
        • Very permissive like BSD or Apache licenses
        • Moderate permissive license located between both extremes (GPL and BSD), dual-licensing depending on the type of user (person, company, ...) or their activies
        • Very strict license, like GPL

        Score : 2/2
    • Copyright owners
      • Rights held by a few individuals or entities, making it easier to change the license
      • Rights held by numerous individuals owning the code in a homogeneous way, making relicense very difficult
      • Rights held by a legal entity in whom the community trusts (e.g: FSF or ASF)

      Score : 2/2
    • Modification of source code
      • No pratical way to propose code modification
      • Tools provided to access and modify code (like CVS or SVN) but not really used to develop the software
      • The code modification process is well defined, exposed and respected, based on roles assignment

      Score : 0/2
    • Roadmap
      • No published roadmap
      • Existing roadmap without planning
      • Versionned roadmap, with planning and measure of delays

      Score : 0/2
    • Sponsor
      • Software has no sponsor, the core team is not paid
      • Software has an unique sponsor who might determine its strategy
      • Software is sponsored by industry

      Score : 0/2
    • Strategical independence
      • No detectable strategy or strong dependency on one unique actor(person, company,sponsor)
      • Strategical vision shared with several other free and open source projects but without strong commitment from copyrights owners
      • Strong independence of the code team, legal entity holding rights, strong involvement in the standardization process

      Score : 0/2

• Basic features

  • Transport
    • Communication modes
      • Synchronous
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • Asynchronous
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • Point-to-point
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • Publish-Subscribe
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • Fire and forget
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
    • Transaction support
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitation
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • Integrated MOM
      • No MOM is provided
      • A MOM is provided but is limited
      • A fully functional MOM is provided

      Score : 0/2
  • Routing
    • Rule based
      • Content based routing
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • Address based routing
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • Metadata based routing
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
    • Script based
      • Not supported
      • Supported, but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
  • Transformation
    • Formats
      • XML
        • XSLT
          • Not supported
          • Supported, but with limitations
          • Fully supported

          Score : 2/2
        • XQuery
          • Not supported
          • Supported, but with limitations
          • Fully supported

          Score : 0/2
      • Non XML formats
        • No features available
        • Very few features available
        • Comprehensive features available

        Score : 1/2
    • Rule based
      • Not supported
      • Supported, but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • Script based
      • Not supported
      • Supported, but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
    • Schema Validation
      • Not supported
      • Supported, but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2

• Adapters

  Shipped adapters

  • Transport adapters
    • JMS
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • HTTP
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • SOAP
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • FTP
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • SMTP
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • RMI
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
    • CORBA
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • XMPP
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
    • Proprietary MOMs
      • No adapters available
      • Limited adapters available
      • Fully functional adapters available for the most known proprietary MOMs

      Score : 0/2
  • Functional Adapters
    • ERP
      • No adapter available
      • Few or poor adapters
      • Fully functional adapters for the most known ERP software

      Score : 2/2
    • CRM
      • No adapter available
      • Few or poor adapters
      • Fully functional adapters for the most known CRM software

      Score : 2/2
  • Data adapters
    • DBMS
      • No adapter available
      • Few or poor adapters
      • Fully functional adapters for the most known DBMS software

      Score : 2/2
    • File
      • No adapter available
      • Adapter available but with limitation
      • Fully functional file adapter

      Score : 2/2

• Advanced features

  • Orchestration
    • Business rules
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitation
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
    • BPEL support
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitation
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
  • Security
    • Authentication
      • JAAS support
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • SAML support
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
    • Authorization
      • No feature available
      • Few or poor features
      • Fully functional features, with SAML support

      Score : 2/2
    • Data encryption
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitation (on encryption algorithms for instance)
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
    • Data integrity
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitation
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
    • PKI support
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitation (no revocation list support for instance)
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
  • Administration
    • Monitoring
      • SNMP support
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • JMX support
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • Supported management software
        • Not supported
        • Few or limited software supported
        • Full integration with most known management software

        Score : 0/2
    • QoS
      • Logging
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • Guaranteed delivery
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • Scalability
        • No features
        • Few and limited features
        • Fully functional features

        Score : 0/2
      • Fault tolerance
        • No features
        • Few and limited features
        • Fully functional features

        Score : 0/2
    • Process control
      • BAM
        • Not supported
        • Supported but with limitation
        • Fully functional features

        Score : 1/2
      • Exception handling
        • Not supported
        • Limited features
        • Fully supported

        Score : 1/2
    • Administration tools
      • No tools available
      • Toolset available but with limited functional coverage
      • Fully functional toolset available, in both GUI and CLI modes

      Score : 2/2
    • Service discovery
      • Not supported
      • Supported but with limitation
      • Fully supported

      Score : 0/2
  • Development tools
    • No tools available
    • Toolset available but with limited functional coverage
    • Fully functional toolset available

    Score : 2/2

• Integration

  • Supported standards
    • BPEL
      • Not supported
      • Supported, but with limitations
      • Fully supported

      Score : 2/2
    • Web Services
      • WSDL
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • SOAP
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • UDDI
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • WS-Transaction
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • WS-Coordination
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • WS-Security
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • WS-Reliability
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • WS-Choreography
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
    • Java standards
      • JCA
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • JBI
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
    • XML standards
      • XSLT
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 2/2
      • XQuery
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • XSD
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
    • SCA
      • SCA supported version
      • Supported service type implementations
      • SCDL support
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • Supported component implementation types
    • SDO
      • Supported version
      • Business Object
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • Business Graph
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • Business Object Type Metadata
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
      • Business Object Services
        • Not supported
        • Supported, but with limitations
        • Fully supported

        Score : 0/2
  • Plugin architecture
    • No plugins support
    • Available plugin architecture but limited (in features or in number of plugins)
    • Comprehensice plugin architecture

    Score : 2/2
  • Extensiblity APIs
    • Adapter API
      • No API available
      • API provided but with limitation
      • Comprehensive APIs available

      Score : 2/2
    • Transport API
      • No API available
      • API provided but with limitation
      • Comprehensive APIs available

      Score : 1/2