"wheezer" wrote : All of the portals have fewer open source portlets than we imagined they would have. Logic says that Red hat's involvement might rev up the portlet development, and probably here at JBP first, but logic has been wrong before. It's been a year and a half. Is that happening, or....? Just a personal opinion, not necessarily representing my employer's ^_^: why does it stand to logic that Red Hat would rev up portlet development? When considering a Portal, should you be looking at the gadget portlets that are bundled and that you will probably not use in your actual portal or at the capabilities of the portal server? Should portal developers spend their time developing portlets or make sure that the actual portal server works properly, scales, is well tested, etc.? To me, the portlet market is completely separate from the portal one. "Interesting" (i.e. portlets that you would use in a business environment) portlets are products with their own lifecycle, independent of portals. Any JSR 168 portlets should work on any JSR-168 compliant portal. If they don't, then either the portlet is not conforming or the portal is wrongly advertising compliance. So my opinion is that you should choose a portal on its technical merits, not on the set of bundled portlets. But then, that's just me! :) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4099477#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...