Tag: Alfresco

Screencast: Basic Alfresco-Kaltura integration

Bryan Spaulding, Media Practice Lead at Optaros, and I have been thinking about lightweight digital asset management and Alfresco. Alfresco can manage any kind of asset, including rich media. It has some built-in functionality for doing image transformations and you can easily integrate with open source solutions like ffmpeg to work with video. But many of our clients need something more, especially when it comes to video.

That’s where Kaltura comes in. Kaltura is a fully hosted video solution that provides full analytics, flexible and customizable players and playlists, and robust back-end CDN and hosting services. You can also download the open source Kaltura Community Edition and run it yourself if you want.

There are a variety of ways Alfresco and Kaltura could work together. We decided to start with a basic integration focused on the Alfresco DM repository. The idea is to use that as a foundation, expanding in the future based on community and client feedback to include deeper functionality for the DM repository or broader integration with other Alfresco products like Alfresco Share and Alfresco WCM.

In this short screencast, I demo the basic CRUD functions the integration provides. You will probably want to hit the “full screen” icon on the Kaltura player to see the detail.

The integration is available as open source. You can download the integration from Kaltura’s community site and use it on your projects, or better yet, expand on it and contribute back the code. The readme that is included with the source includes installation and configuration instructions.

Screencast: Drupal Open Atrium with Alfresco CMIS

UPDATE: Screencast now lives here:

I recorded a quick screencast of a simple integration we did to show Open Atrium leveraging Alfresco as a formal document repository via CMIS. This leverages the CMIS Alfresco module we developed and released on Drupal.org.

As I point out in the screencast, there’s not much to the integration from a technical standpoint. Open Atrium is Drupal and the CMIS module already has a CMIS repository browser. So, all we had to do was expose the module as a “feature”, which is something Open Atrium uses to bundle modules together that create a given chunk of functionality.

Readers familiar with Alfresco Share will instantly recognize the Open Atrium concepts. Instead of “sites” Atrium uses “groups”. Instead of “pages” or “tools”, Atrium uses “features”. The overall purpose, self-provisioned team-based collaboration, is the same and many of the tools/features are the same (blog, calendar, member directory). I’m not advocating using one over the other–as usual, what works best for you depends on a lot of factors. I just thought Atrium provided a nice way to show yet another example of Drupal and Alfresco together (post).

Book review: Alfresco 3 Content Management Implementation

Packt recently sent me a copy of Munwar Shariff’s updated book, Alfresco 3 Content Management Implementation. The book is a comprehensive guide to Alfresco from an end-user or power user perspective.

How comprehensive? This edition offers 239 new pages (including the index) over the original. That’s a lot of net new content. The first seven chapters are roughly the same as the first edition, covering fundamentals, installation, security, basic library services, rules, and the content model. The Collaboration and Syndication coverage has morphed into a chapter on Share & SharePoint which is very timely as there is a lot of activity around that area of the product right now.

The organization of the book feels improved over the first edition. It now follows a very logical progression through the entire platform. There are still places where the information feels superfluous (the discussion of ActiveDirectory versus Novell eDirectory, for example) or aimed at a different audience (Chapter 9’s coverage of integration with other systems) but overall I think Shariff and his team have done a great job of covering an expansive platform and its many use cases.

If you are evaluating Alfresco, just getting started with the platform, or you are looking for the missing manual for end-users and power users, you should take a look.

Disclosure: Packt provided me a copy of this book free of charge. Also, Munwar and his team of authors work for Cignex, a services firm that, from time-to-time, competes for business against my company, Optaros.

Drupal + Alfresco webinar slides available

People want intranets that are fun and easy to use, full of compelling content relevant to their job, and enabled with social and community features to help them discover connections with other teams, projects, and colleagues. IT wants something that’s lightweight and flexible enough to respond to the needs of the business that won’t cost a fortune.

That’s why Drupal + Alfresco is a great combination for things like intranets like the one Optaros built for Activision and why we had a record-breaking turnout for the Drupal + Alfresco webinar Chris Fuller and I did today. Thanks to everyone who came and asked good questions. I’ve posted the slides. Alfresco recorded the webinar so they’ll make it available soon, I’m sure. When that happens, I’ll update the post with a link. Until then, enjoy the slides.

[UPDATE: Fixed the slideshare link (thanks, David!) and added the links to the webinar recording below]

1. Streaming recording link:
https://alfresco.webex.com/alfresco/lsr.php?AT=pb&SP=TC&rID=42774837&act=pb&rKey=b44130d69cc9ec5f

2. Download recording link:
https://alfresco.webex.com/alfresco/ldr.php?AT=dw&SP=TC&rID=42774837&act=pf&rKey=c50049ac82e1220a

Packt Author of the Year Award

I mentioned it on Twitter yesterday but I definitely wanted to spend more than 140 characters saying thanks. If you missed the tweet, what I’m talking about is that Packt announced that I won the Author of the Year Award for the Alfresco Developer Guide.

Earlier this year they had a nomination process which resulted in readers choosing me as a finalist. Getting that far was really cool and I definitely want to say thanks to the readers of the book and the blog for making that happen.

The next step was a round of judging. This took a while and I can’t imagine the process whereby you get a panel of judges, with different backgrounds and full-time jobs (I assume) to look at six technical books that cover a wide range of topics (Alfresco, Drupal, Ext JS, JavaScript, and SOA) and subsequently make sense of the feedback. Definitely a big thanks to Packt and the panel of judges who worked hard to make this happen.

The book was certainly a team effort. I had a great team of technical reviewers, and they were instrumental. I think it’s also important to recognize my firm, Optaros, because the project couldn’t have happened without their support and encouragement. The entire Alfresco team also got behind it in one way or another and that was important to the success as well.

Alright, enough said. I’ll quit before I start working my way down the family tree. Maybe Twitter’s length restriction really is the best thing for an acceptance speech. Thanks, again, to everyone involved!

Understanding the differences between Alfresco’s repository implementations

People new to Alfresco are often unaware of the existence of two different repository implementations within the product. One, which I’ll call the “DM Store”, is the classic store, the one that’s been used by Alfresco since the beginning. The other, the “WCM Store” or, as it is often referred to in API-speak, the “AVM Store”, was born with the addition of the Alfresco WCM product offering. Whether you are doing document management or web content management, you use the same Explorer client, but under the covers, your content lives in two very different types of repositories.

The Alfresco story on why a second repository implementation was created is that the Engineers writing WCM didn’t believe the DM store was capable of providing the kind of support for versioning, branching, and layering functionality they needed (hence, the AVM acronym, which stands for Advanced Versioning Manager) so they created an entirely new repository implementation to support WCM.

Why does this matter, apart from being a possible topic of conversation at your next get-together (“Healthcare is easy to fix. Do you think Alfresco will ever unify their two repository implementations?”)? It matters because the “two sides” of Alfresco are not equivalent in terms of functionality and depending on what you need to do, you may find yourself performing unnatural acts to work around the disparity.

Many projects will be completely unaffected by the differences between Alfresco DM and Alfresco WCM. But it is important to know what these differences are when you first begin to plan your solution to avoid uncomfortable conversations between you and your customer when you realize you’ve made a bad assumption.

I’ll assume you know the high-level capabilities of both Alfresco DM and Alfresco WCM. Obviously there are some things one product can do that the other can’t that are by design (sandboxes and virtualization in WCM, for example). What’s more important to understand are the subtle (and sometimes not-so subtle) differences between the two. Here’s the list and a table that summarizes, if you are into the whole brevity thing:

Content Modeling. Alfresco DM uses a proprietary XML-based description of the content model while Alfresco WCM uses XML Schema. On the surface this isn’t a big deal, but it does mean if your repository contains a mix of DM- and WCM-stored data, you won’t have a single model that defines it all and you could possibly have duplication between the two.

Custom Content Types. In Alfresco DM, when you create content, you tell Alfresco what its content type is. If you’ve extended the out-of-the-box model, you can have any number of business-specific content types with your own custom metadata. In Alfresco WCM, custom content types are not supported. In WCM, your content type is your web form. Interestingly, although the “Type” dropdown is shown in the “Create Web Content” dialog, and it will contain custom content types you’ve defined using the Alfresco DM model, your selection will not be honored. All AVM content is created as an instance of the “avmplaincontent” content type no matter what you select. However, although you must do it through an API call, you can apply custom aspects to AVM content.

User Interface Configuration. Alfresco DM uses a proprietary XML-based configuration file to define the “property sheets” that display metadata in the Alfresco Explorer client for a given content type or aspect. Alfresco WCM uses the embedded Chiba XForms engine to inspect the XML Schema (XSD) and automatically create a web form that will produce data that conforms to the XSD. XSD annotations can be used to influence the presentation of the form fields. One outcome of this is that it is much easier to localize things like property labels in Alfresco DM than it is in Alfresco WCM.

User Interface Extension. If you need to change how the Alfresco Explorer client behaves, there are some things you can do through XML, but advanced customizations will require JavaServer Faces (JSF) development. Alfresco DM and WCM both use the same Explorer client so this applies to both (See “Alfresco User Interface: What are my options?”). However, if you need to change how the web form engine works, you may need to write new Chiba XForms widgets. For instance, Optaros developed a web form used to describe points and regions on Google Maps. That kind of thing requires you to understand how to extend Chiba.

Structured (XML) data entry. Data entered in an Alfresco WCM web form is saved as XML that conforms to the XSD you’ve defined. There is no similar facility for capturing data as XML available within Alfresco DM. At one point the Community code line had “ECM Forms” which was essentially WCM web forms for the DM side of the house, but that’s disappeared in the latest Community release. On the DM side, when you edit metadata you are editing object properties whose values get stored in the database, not as XML.

Transformations. You can use either Freemarker or XSLT to transform Alfresco web form XML into other formats. That transformation is defined as part of the web form configuration which you do within the Explorer client. In Alfresco DM, transformations are more about binary file transformations (DOC to PDF or GIF to PNG, for example). If you want to do Freemarker or XSLT transformations on XML content stored in Alfresco DM, you’ll need to write that yourself (an Action would do the trick). If you want to do DM-style transformations on binary files in Alfresco WCM, that’s not out-of-the-box. You’ll have to do that using the API.

Rule actions. Alfresco DM allows you to configure rules on folders to trigger actions (out-of-the-box or custom) to operate against newly-added, updated, or deleted documents. Alfresco WCM does not support rule actions at all.

Auditing. Alfresco DM has a granular auditing sub-system. You can configure it to audit just about anything you want. Anything except WCM. You can audit web project creation, but not changes to individual web assets within a web project. At least not out-of-the-box.

Object-level permissions. In Alfresco DM you can assign users and groups to roles at the folder and file level. In Alfresco WCM, the UI will only let you go as low as the web project level. The API supports more granular security but you have to implement that yourself with custom code.

Search. Everything in Alfresco DM is full-text indexed and searchable. In Alfresco WCM, only the Staging Sandbox of each web project is indexed. You can do a search from your user sandbox but you’re really searching the Staging Sandbox. If you have any content you’ve created in your user sandbox that you have not yet committed to Staging, web project search won’t find it. Another limitation is that you cannot search across web projects. That search box that’s visible in the far upper right-hand corner of the Alfresco Explorer client is the Alfresco DM search–it won’t find anything in any of your web projects.

Advanced Workflow. Alfresco DM and Alfresco WCM use the same JBoss jBPM workflow engine so there’s no functional difference between what you can do with workflow on either side. The only catch is that in Alfresco DM, all deployed workflows show up in the “Start Advanced Workflow” dialog whereas in WCM, you have to tell Alfresco which deployed workflows are okay to use for WCM. That’s covered in the Alfresco Developer Guide and on the wiki.

File protocols. CIFS and FTP are the only two file protocols supported by both Alfresco DM and Alfresco WCM. Similar protocols supported by Alfresco DM such as WebDAV, inbound SMTP, and IMAP, are not supported by Alfresco WCM.

Deployment. Some people use Alfresco DM to manage content that is published to the web because they don’t need the additional features WCM offers, or they have some other reason to export content to another server. Unfortunately, Alfresco DM does not yet offer a deployment component like the one in Alfresco WCM. If you want to export content from Alfresco DM to some other destination in a systematic way, you’ll have to roll your own solution.

As John and Paul said, “It’s getting better”

Some of these differences will become less drastic in coming releases. For example, Alfresco is implementing a new form service that will be used to define the content model and user interface across the entire product line, so that helps. The WCM deployment functionality is also being refactored and will ultimately work for both DM and WCM. And at every community event Alfresco talks about “repository unification” as a goal for the future, although the timeline is lightyears away in terms of software releases.

As I said, depending on what you’re doing these differences may not affect you at all. Just make sure you don’t assume that a given feature is available everywhere, and make sure you’ve made a conscious decision about what content to put in which repository (DM or WCM) based on your requirements.

Yet another reason to love Open Source Content Management

Man, I don’t miss delivering solutions on top of Documentum. After reading Laurence Hart’s post on Documentum Developer Edition, I’m reminded how much I take for granted working exclusively in the open source content management world.

Laurence’s post was intended to discuss the ins and outs of Documentum’s efforts to make it easier for developers, and, as usual, he’s done a good job of that. But it also underscores the benefits enjoyed by those who work in open source land. In case you don’t know how good you’ve got it, my open source brothers and sisters, check it out:

Developers working with closed source ECM vendors have to pay to get the software

As Laurence points out,

“There are lots of independent consultants out there that have trouble keeping-up with the technology because they can’t afford to become partners for the requisite fee.”

If you are a developer looking to go deep on closed source software, you have no choice but to pay. There’s no other way to get access to the software. Sometimes you can’t even get access to the documentation or the bug database without a paid-up partner account (or a client that lets you use theirs).

[UPDATE: Jerry Silver, from EMC, points out that the Documentum Developer Edition is a free download. My original post made it sound like you had to be part of the partner program to obtain the download.]

With open source, the barrier to entry is much lower. You pay nothing to get the software. It’s all about the time and energy you put into learning the product and implementing cool solutions.

To be fair, commercial open source vendors often charge partner fees as well, but the bottom line is that it costs nothing to get started with the code.

Developers working with closed source ECM vendors struggle with giant developer footprints

I feel sorry for Laurence’s laptop:

“The complete Development install calls for 3GB of RAM (after a 1.7+GB download).  That is no small thing for a development laptop.  It needs to be on a newer machine.  If you can move the database service to a different box, that will make your life easier.”

Oh dear. A 1.7GB download for a developer setup? Am I downloading a VM image or a content management server? Let’s look at Alfresco for a comparison. Assuming you are starting from scratch, and assuming you are going to go full-on with the Alfresco platform, your total download is right around 300MB. That includes:

  • Alfresco SDK
  • Alfresco WAR
  • Alfresco WCM (Deployment listener and add-on to core repo)
  • Apache Tomcat
  • Sun JDK
  • MySQL (Server and connector)

All of which runs comfortably in 2GB of RAM and won’t even cause your fan to kick on in 4GB.

Developers working with closed source ECM vendors have less choice

Optaros consultants are now split fairly evenly in their choice of OS across Windows, Mac OS X, and some flavor of Linux. Some people prefer MySQL and some prefer PostgreSQL. Mostly we use Eclipse for Java development but everyone’s got a preference. I use Tomcat for everything locally while others like JBoss. The point is, developers want to use their tools the way they want to. It’s not a stubbornness thing it’s an efficiency thing.

Within my CMS I want the same flexibility. I want to tweak settings. I want to name my database what I want. I want the flexibility to deploy across as many (or as few) nodes as I need to. From Laurence’s post, it sounds like Documentum clearly falls down here.

Developers working with closed source ECM vendors can’t see the code

It’s obvious, I know. For developers that work with open source it is extremely natural to use the CMS source code when debugging or for reference. You don’t even think about it–it’s just there and you use it. Imagine the frustration of someone who works with closed source CMS who has to routinely decompile classes to figure out what’s going on. That truly sucks. What good is a “Developer Edition” that doesn’t come with source code?

Partner defections from closed source are on the rise

I’ve seen recent announcements from multiple partners who were previously exclusive to closed source vendors but are now adding open source to their partner list. This is a reflection of increasing demand by customers who are realizing the business value of open source, especially in tough economic times as well as partners’ desire to make up for sagging demand in the proprietary world. But could it also be that more firms are realizing how much more productive and pleasant it is to work with open source content management?

Help your employer/client see the light

Open source ECM technologies like Alfresco, Drupal, Liferay, Lucene, and many others, are now at or beyond their closed source equivalents. If you are a developer who’s sick of the shackles closed source CMS places on you, why not suggest exploring open source alternatives?

Alfresco Developer Guide source reorg and 3.2 Community update

[UPDATE: Added a link to the source code that works with 3.2 Enterprise]

I originally wrote the Alfresco Developer Guide source code for Alfresco 2.2 Enterprise and Alfresco 3 Labs. The code was pretty much the same regardless of which one you were running. For things that did happen to be different, I handled those with separate projects: one for community-specific stuff and one for enterprise-specific stuff. This was pretty much limited to minor web script differences for the “client extensions” projects and LDAP configuration differences for the “server extension” project.

With the release of 3.2 Community, I realized:

  • The number of different flavors of Alfresco any given reader might be running are going up, not down. Who knows when 2.2 Enterprise will be sunset.
  • It is no longer as easy as “Enterprise” versus “Labs/Community” because multiple releases of the same flavor are prevalent (2.2E, 3.0E, and 3.1E, for example).
  • Tagging my code in Subversion by Chapter alone is no longer enough–I need to tag by Chapter and by Alfresco version.
  • Sending the publisher the code one chapter at-a-time and expecting them to manage updates and deciding how to organize all of the chapter code was a bad idea.

So, I’ve done some work to make this better (reorg the projects, restructure the download files). I’ve also tested the example code from each chapter against the latest service packs for all releases since 2.2 Enterprise. That includes making some small updates to get the examples running on 3.2 Community.

You can now download either all of the source for every version I tested against, or, download the source that works for a specific version. It may take the official download site at Packt a while to get the new files, so here are links to download them from my site:

Alfresco Developer Guide example source code for…

  • Alfresco 2.2 Enterprise (~5.3 MB, Download)
  • Alfresco 3.0 Labs (~5.6 MB, Download)
  • Alfresco 3.0 Enterprise (~5.7 MB, Download)
  • Alfresco 3.1 Enterprise (~5.6 MB, Download)
  • Alfresco 3.2 Community (~5.7 MB, Download)
  • Alfresco 3.2 Enterprise (~5.9 MB, Download)
  • All of the above, combined (~28.1 MB, Download)

Hopefully this makes it easier for you to grab only what you need and makes it clear that each Eclipse project contains only what’s needed to work with that version of Alfresco. Deployment is easier too. Most of the time, it’s just the “someco-client-extensions” project that you deploy.

Now that I’ve got everything structured like I want it, as new versions of Alfresco are released, it should be much easier to keep up.

ECM vendors have their heads in the cloud, can you see through the fog?

The hype around cloud computing has reached a fevered pitch so it is natural that ECM vendors try to take advantage of that as much as they can. Some examples from the open source ECM world:

  • Alfresco always seems to be partnering with one cloud vendor or another. I went to a brief session on Alfresco, GoGrid, and ParaScale earlier this year. (As an aside, those GoGrid cycling socks, which I thought was a strange giveaway at the time, are awesome).
  • At the end of last year eZ Publish announced a partnership with Mamut to provide eZ as SaaS.
  • Just last week Nuxeo announced a cloud edition of its product.

Clearly, ECM vendors are busy figuring out how to take advantage of the cloud. But what does it mean for ECM to be “in the cloud”? When might it work for you?

Cirrus, Stratus, or Cumulonimbus

The first thing you need to realize is that when people say “cloud” they often mean very different things. Generally, there are three types of clouds: Software-as-a-Service (Saas), Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS), and Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS).

Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) is the same model that’s been around for years but has lately taken advantage of the cloud moniker. Google Apps and Salesforce.com are the big SaaS players but there are SaaS offerings for all kinds of business applications, including content management.

The allure of SaaS ECM is the same as that of SaaS in general:

  • Lower up-front costs
  • Someone else gets to worry about running and scaling the infrastructure
  • Depending on the vendor, you may only have to pay for what you use

The challenges of SaaS ECM include things like:

  • The ability to do heavy customization and complex workflows
  • Ease of integration with other systems
  • Client perceptions (and real issues) around data security
  • Data portability/vendor lock-in

Open Source CM vendors Nuxeo and eZ Systems have SaaS offerings as do proprietary vendors such as SpringCM, CrownPeak, Clickability, and PaperThin, to name a few. Beyond just general-purpose document and content management, I think you’ll also see vendors build verticalized SaaS offerings on top of hosted content management technology.

The next type of cloud is Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS). The two best examples of PaaS are Google App Engine (GAE) and Salesforce.com’s force.com platform. With PaaS, you provide the code and the PaaS provider does the rest. Of course this means your code has to follow certain standards and is often subject to limitations, but the beauty is that you get a completely custom solution without worrying about any of the infrastructure.

I like GAE. For certain applications, the benefits of instantaneous, global scale far outweigh the limitations of the platform. But I don’t expect ECM vendors that would do well in SaaS or IaaS clouds to do much with PaaS. You can’t take an Alfresco or a Drupal and run it on a PaaS cloud. I do think we will see PaaS-native content management systems. For example, I’ve seen apps in the Salesforce.com AppExchange that are basically tools for building a web site that’s tightly integrated with Salesforce.com. I think you’ll also see solutions that leverage a PaaS for certain components or sub-systems.

The third type of cloud is Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS). An IaaS cloud is about providing virtual servers on-demand. Examples include things like Amazon’s EC2, Rackspace Cloud, and GoGrid. With these services you can instantly provision as many servers as you need. What you do with them is up to you. When you’re done, you turn them off. Specifics vary but you are essentially billed for CPU time.

The way people leverage IaaS differs. Some people will provision a server and install their ECM software of choice and stop there. Other than dealing with different file storage approaches of various IaaS vendors, this is really no different than running your own virtual servers. So when someone says they are running XYZ CMS “in the cloud” and it turns out to be a single node on a virtual machine, I can barely stifle a yawn. It’s fast and convenient to set up, yes, but technically it’s pretty boring.

The more interesting way to use ECM in an IaaS cloud is to leverage the ability of the infrastructure to scale on-demand. That’s the real value of “the cloud” after all. For example, at Optaros we run an IaaS-hosted solution called OView that syndicates content and content-centric applications to web sites. When a client places that content or app on Yahoo’s home page we get a huge spike in traffic. We run the solution on Amazon EC2 images and we use RightScale to dynamically provision additional nodes when traffic warrants.

The degree to which a specific ECM vendor can operate in a dynamically-scaled infrastructure varies greatly. Simply “running in the cloud” is easy. Scaling your ECM infrastructure automagically is harder.

What do you really need?

If the list of SaaS benefits have a lot of appeal to you and the challenges and potential limitations aren’t much of a bother, SaaS ECM might be worth evaluating. This will most likely be a better fit for clients with limited IT resources and simple to moderate requirements around ECM.

On the IaaS front, if it is just an issue of externally-hosting your ECM infrastructure, make sure the cloud is what you want. The best use case for the cloud is when demand is temporary or unpredictable with huge spikes. I would argue that for your core ECM infrastructure demand is neither temporary nor unpredictable.

If “scale” is your issue, I would challenge you to think about exactly what needs to be scaled. If it is just content delivery of static content, maybe you could get by with a CDN. If your content management system can separate authoring from dynamic delivery of content, maybe only the dynamic content delivery mechanism needs to be able to scale quickly.

You might have certain processes (large-scale video transcoding, for example, or other types of periodic batch processing) that you could leverage the cloud for without cloud-enabling your entire ECM infrastructure. Acquia‘s hosted spam filtering service, Mollum, and their newly-released hosted-search offering are two examples where only specific pieces of your infrastructure are off-loaded to the cloud.

If it turns out that you need to scale the whole ball of wax, fine, it can be done, but have a good reason.

ECM in the cloud is, um, cloudy

The cloud as a style of computing is exciting. The cloud as a “feature” is potentially confusing. ECM vendors are going to do what they can do have it somewhere “on the box”. But it’s not something you can simply check off. The next time you hear an ECM vendor say, “cloud-ready”, ask them what they mean. Then figure out whether or not that has any relevance at all to your real requirements.

Is the cloud on your horizon? Let me know if/how the cloud relates to your ECM strategy.

The Alfresco forums need your help

I was looking at the “unanswered posts” view in the Alfresco Forums today and was surprised to see it was 40 pages long. I know the growing list of unanswered posts has been a problem for quite a while because Nancy Garrity has mentioned it multiple times and I don’t know what the high water mark is for unanswered posts but 40 pages seems bad.

I admit that I haven’t been answering questions in the forums as often as I’d like and that’s bad too. So I took some time today to answer a few. You should do the same. Why should Russ Danner (503 posts) have all the fun?

Maybe instead of “follow fridays” on Twitter we should encourage “forum fridays” amongst the Alfresco community.