Just a side-note: according to Wikipedia article [1] there are already some commercial PaaS providers based on CloudFork:
- Uhuru Software, Inc. is one company that has created a AppCloud using Cloud Foundry. Uhuru's PaaS provides support for multiple frameworks (.NET, Rails, and Spring) and languages (Java, Ruby, PHP, and C#). - AppFog hosts their PaaS on Amazon Web Services, OpenStack and Windows Azure.[1] [2] - ActiveState is a company that has created a commercial distribution of the Cloud Foundry software for enterprises to host their own private PaaS. Their product has support for additional languages and frameworks, an adds a dashboard and security protocols.[3] - Tier 3 is a company that has created an Enterprise-oriented PaaS combining Cloud Foundry with their Iron Foundry OSS Project that provides .NET and SQL Server Support. About commercial cloudfoundry.com: As of September 2012, this service is still in beta and pricing is not yet determined. So, question is, what are long-term VMware plans with CloudFoundry, and in this light, maybe supporting another provider like proposed OpenShift is not a bad idea, for many reasons: - more experience will be gained running on the another cloud - more general PhaaS, which can run on more than one cloud - more independent of cloud providers Best regards Janko [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_Foundry Dne 27. 01. 2013 12:51, piše Andy Burnett: >>> . >> >> I built CloudFoundry so that you uploaded a .st file (in my ESUG example it >> was 'aida.st') that was used to build the image. The server executed the .st >> file and saved the resulting image (it could load .mcz files directly or >> execute a Metacello script). Whenever your application was needed, a copy of >> the saved image was used. >> >> James Foster > > James, can I check a few assumptions - I want to make sure I am not > putting words in VMWare's mouth, or missing an opportunity. > > 1. Is it the case that CloudFoundry.com has no current plans to offer > gemstone as a hosted option? > > 2. Your work on getting Aida to run was targeted at the > cloudfoundry.org, And therefore it would require someone to set up a > separate hosting operation - using the cloudfoundry code - in order > for us to use your work? > > If 1 and 2 are true, is there anyway that we can use the .com side in > pursuit of this PhaaS objective? I assume not, but I would hate to > miss the simple fix :-) > > Cheers > Andy > > -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
