I've just noticed that the Avoka Create User Create Group service got installed along with the Adobe services when I installed LiveCycle ES2. Has this component been licensed by Adobe on behalf of their users? I see that the Avoka web site indicates that while you can use their components freely for development and testing, they want money before you can use them in production. Does this apply to the Create User Create Group component too?
I'm thinking of using this in a solution for a customer however I don't want to incur licensing costs on their behalf.
In the "Avoka" category at the top.
I have LiveCycle Rights Management, Reader Extensions, Digitial Signatures, Output, Forms and Reader Extensions installed. I don't know if it's specific to one of those. I believe I've seen this before in ES too, so I don't think it's specific to ES2.
Rob is right when you go through step by step instruction one of the step mentioned as:
"Configuring the sample:
Note: Before configuring and running this sample, it is necessary to deploy and run the Sample Setup Utility."
The LCA file mentioned (Adobe-Samples-SetupUtility.lca) has different Avoka components, services, process which get deployed during this step.
and the code for Avoka component is not provided ( see AvokaComponent.compjar com.avoka.livecycle.createLocalPrincipal.CreatePrincipleService.class)
May be it is helpful to have one sample (that just depends on all components and modules from Adobe only ) that shows how this task can be achieved without using 'Sample Setup Utility'. (java / orchestration that calls differnt service and produce same exact result that 'Sample Setup Utility' does)
I did followup but I haven't hear a definit answer.
I think you should treat this component like any other Avoka components. You'll need a license to use it.
I'll let you know if I hear otherwise, but I have a sense this is how it's going to work.
Thanks for the answer Jasmin.
Would you mind logging a bug on this issue? To my mind, there's two possible reasons why these components are included in the samples:
1) Someone goofed. That's OK, mistakes get made however a bug should be logged to remove them.
2) These were included on purpose. That's OK too, but I think some clarification with respect to the licensing conditions is required. In the absence of any documentation to the contrary I believe it's reasonable for a user to assume that they can legitimately use anything that "ships in the box". If that's not the case, then a documentation bug should be logged to make it clear what the licensing restrictions on these components are.