[erlang-questions] Freedom Box and Erlang
Mon Jun 20 21:04:59 CEST 2011
True. CloudFoundry exists and is open source. However, it is Ruby based so it is unable to scale like an Erlang system (like CloudI). CloudFoundry is control by VMware, which is an organization, and they are using the Apache License 2.0. CloudI is independent and uses a BSD license, so it can be reused anywhere.
On 06/20/2011 11:34 AM, Tim Watson wrote:
> There is also http://www.cloudfoundry.org, which is sponsored by
> vmware and has a commercial offering too (at cloudfoundry.com) but is
> open source - https://github.com/cloudfoundry.
> On 20 June 2011 15:55, Evans, Matthew <> wrote:
>> Seems like you have an interesting project with cloudi.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Truog [mailto:]
>> Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 3:15 PM
>> Cc: Evans, Matthew
>> Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] Freedom Box and Erlang
>> To have an Erlang cloud that doesn't depend on an organization, there is CloudI (http://cloudi.org) . So it could be used for running applications on a distributed mesh. There is ZeroMQ integration that could provide communication between the FreedomBoxes. CloudI currently lacks a pretty UI for managing the configuration and will be going through more testing, so those are current barriers.
>> On 06/18/2011 10:54 AM, Evans, Matthew wrote:
>>> I've recently been reading about Freedom box (see: http://wiki.debian.org/FreedomBox and http://freedomboxfoundation.org/).
>>> In a nutshell, directly from their website:
>>> "Smart devices whose engineered purpose is to work together to facilitate free communication among people, safely and securely, beyond the ambition of the strongest power to penetrate, they can make freedom of thought and information a permanent, ineradicable feature of the net that holds our souls."
>>> "We live in a world where our use of the network is mediated by organizations that often do not have our best interests at heart. By building software that does not rely on a central service, we can regain control and privacy. By keeping our data in our homes, we gain useful legal protections over it. By giving back power to the users over their networks and machines, we are returning the Internet to its intended peer-to-peer architecture. "
>>> I'm not a member of the organization, but it seems to me that the distributed nature of Erlang could offer awesome possibilities to work around certain technical difficulties. I could, for example, envisage a mesh of Erlang nodes connected together providing various distributed services where no individual is in overall control. Or you could provide services (Erlang processes/application) owned and managed by someone from a country with poor human rights that is in fact running on an Erlang node on a country with better human rights (a chat service for example). I'm not talking about "cloud" services here (that some organization ultimately owns), but running applications on a mesh of privately owned "Freedom boxes" that host Erlang VMs. The beauty of Erlang is that it's innate ability to distribute code, processes and applications in such a simple and seamless manner could provide very powerful tools for the organization.
>>> Any comments and thoughts on this?
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions