Since Target Integration released CiviSync - CiviCRM Outlook Synchronization Addon in April this year, I have seen a lot of people asking about it and thanks to those who tested it and provided their feedback. Initial CiviSync was developed for CiviCRM version 2.2 and Outlook 2003/2007.
Based on your feedbacks and the updated requirement from our clients it is time that we need to update the component again but as we all know that CiviCRM has changed big time since version 2.2. The REST API has matured very well and is now very much available to test and use which will ensure that we don't need to put/include nuSOAP in the latest version. Also, Outlook 2010 has been released as well. Outlook 2003 and 2007 development was based around Visual Studio Tools for Office (VSTO) Version 3.0 but new Outlook 2010 doesn't work with the older version and it needs VSTO version 4.0. There were other problems with the first version of CiviSync which I am not going to talk about in this post as the new version will be a complete re-write (almost) of the code base.
We are planning to bring in the following:
- Compatibility with CiviCRM Version 3.2 on Joomla and Drupal
- Compatibility with Microsoft Outlook 2003/2007/2010
- Authentication with Joomla/Drupal Users
- Two way synchronization of contacts, groups and tags
- Option to select the groups and tags for synchronization (Similar to IMAP folders)
- Sending Email from Outlook and attaching it to CiviCRM Contact
This cool feature set is the starting point only, we are planning to extending CiviSync to further in to other Microsoft Office© applications e.g. Word for mail merge etc.
Of course this development is going to cost and the cost in this case is going to be the Open Source License of CiviSync. We are planning to make CiviSync commercial but to make it accessible to everyone, the plan is to keep the cost at a very affordable rate of Euro 15 per license, out of this Euro 5 will be donated to support the development of CiviCRM. This will allow organisations and individuals equally to support the development of the addon and CiviCRM.
I would like to know what is the general feedback about the above idea and of course let us know of any features that you think should be included in CiviSync.
Comments
I think it is important that different funding models are explored for implementing new functionality.
Where the solution being offered is "outside of CiviCRM" and is bridging "Civi" to a proprietary solution such as Office, my initial thoughts are that a pricing model like you propose, that involves a contribution back to the Civi core development team for a closed licensed "add on" is worth considering.
Of course the community may ultimately prefer to pool funding to develop an open solution building on the current CiviSync that was generously licensed under GPL 3...
Would you have a funding target for the community to contribute to you building it as Free and Open Source Software rather than proprietary?
Andrew, yes there can be a funding target for the community to contribute but that will not benefit CiviCRM directly and that will not have a high level of support built around it.
CiviSync is and will be built in .NET and if there are enough financial support and there are people who are ready to support it in future, I don't see a reason why it can not be Open Source.
Improving the CiviCRM ecosystem by providing additional services and functionality is great to my mind, and a variety of business models may work.
What versions of Windows will your new CiviSync application need? At some point it would be worth seeing performance differences when a Linux CiviCRM server and a Windows CiviSync server are on a shared 1 Gb LAN in a datacentre versus in different datacentres. Perhaps CiviSync could be an ASP cloud service.
I think connectors into Google Apps and Exchange Server make sense, and it would be nice if you are open to licensing schemes that would allow that.
At a different level, you might want to consider a pricing model that makes it free for organizations with a small number of contacts and more for ones with many contacts, on the assumption the latter are likely to have more money.
Joe,
CiviSync will work with Windows XP and above.
Thanks for the idea about pricing but I think that licensing model is a little biased and difficult to manage.
My understanding of the way that licenses work is that something like this couldn't be released under GPL (2, 3, or otherwise), since whatever license Outlook is released under is not compatible with the GPL (I'm making an assumption here, but I think it's a safe bet).
Hi Dalin
The issue is that code which incorporates GPL'd code can't be licensed under a closed licence rather than GPL'd code not being able to communicate with proprietary code. So it is as much an issue of how you design the proprietary non-AGPL'd code to talk to CiviCRM's AGPL'd code, while respecting the AGPL, as it is how you have it talk to Outlook.
How would CiviSync behave in the situation where Outlook is a client of a MS Exchange Server? Would there be any differences? Would contacts from CiviCRM end up in an Exchange distribution lists or Active Directory?
Also, how would CiviSync behave in the situation where Outlook is a client of Google Apps, using the Google Apps Outlook connector? This connector is different than using Outlook as a POP/IMAP client to Google. It is a native Windows application developed by Google. ( Its part of the Google Apps education edition and premier edition)
Perhaps it would make more sense to have a CiviSync/MS Exchange connector and/or a CiviSync/Google Apps connector, as most Outlook users are connected to one or the other.
CiviSync currently creates its own folder called CiviSync in your Outlook contacts and hence it doesn't interfere with the contacts in Exchange Server.
CiviSync/MS Exchange or CiviSync/Google Apps connector may make sense but the current plan of CiviSync is email server independent.
Have you looked at the Salesforce.com integration with Google Apps? It would be fantastic to have something in that neighborhood for CiviCRM.
( I am a bit biased because I normally recommend to nonprofits that they switch from Outlook/Exchange to Google Apps Nonprofit edition. )
Hi Sarah,
You are right. It will make a lot of sense to develop something similar to this but that will be a Google Marketplace App which is required.
Hi,
vtiger have a plugin for outlook.
http://www.vtiger.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=139
Wouldn't be faster to either modify the plugin to talk in the civicrm expected REST interface instead of the vtiger one (had a quick look at their API doesn't seem to be that different than civi), or alternatively to develop a vtiger webservice insterface that mimic what vtiger does so the plugin can work directly ?
Looked at vtiger as it seems to be more opensource than sugar and I couldn't find on the later an opensource plugin, but would work as well with sugar.
Hi Xavier,
Fortunately, we are vTiger partners as well and yes the basic idea is coming from their open source plugin which is built in visual basic. It is dated and doesn't work properly with latest versions of Outlook. They have gone to the same path as well where partners have developed Outlook plugins which work with the CRM and are commercial.
Hi polestar
That all sounds great. We have lost a couple of pitches over the years on the lack of Outlook integration and I'm pretty sure a few of our clients would pay for some licences. What kind of time-frame do you envisage for the next phase of development?
DaveM
Hi,
I've been investigating and trying to install vTiger but in doing so, I've come across CiviCRM which is perfect for the site I am working on. I really need the Outlook synchronisation if you have one. Can you tell me what the progress is with this?
Thank you :)
I also have clients for whom this functionality would be useful and welcome, to the point where they may be willing to make a financial contribution. Keen to learn about any progress or plans for CiviSync.
Hi,
Is this project still running ?
A partner of mine would be very interested in this feature and ready to contribute financially (through Make It Happen or licencing)
I guess at this time, we would talk about CiviCRM version > 4.0
Thanks