InstantDB Project
About InstantDB
Project Mail Lists
Short History
Reporting Bugs
Screen Shots
3rd Party Examples
FAQs

Software
Downloads
Documentation
CVS Repositories
Roadmap
License

About Enhydra.org
Who We Are
News, Articles & Events
Getting Involved
Contact Us

Community
Demos
Contributions
Resources
Case Studies
On The Edge! -NEW-
Commercial Vendors

Thanks Keith

> Thanks for the post.  If I know Peter, he'd probably
> prefer that I answer marketing questions and that he
> get to answer engineering ones...  :)

Definitely!

Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-instantDB@enhydra.org [mailto:owner-instantDB@enhydra.org]On
Behalf Of Keith Bigelow
Sent: 28 November 2000 16:35
To: terry@net-frame.com; peter.hearty@lutris.com; instantDB@enhydra.org
Cc: Paul Morgan (E-mail); Greg Schwarzer (E-mail)
Subject: InstantDB: Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 07:34:39 -0800


Terry,

Thanks for the post.  If I know Peter, he'd probably prefer that I answer
marketing questions and that he get to answer engineering ones...  :)

So, you post asks 3 questions:

a>  Why is the licensing vague on IDB on instantdb.enhydra.org?
b>  What's up with releasing the source?
c>  You planning in reindeer games with the licensing??

The short answer to "A" is "We've been really busy and a little sloppy."
When we acquired ICS/IDB, we were unclear on how we'd license it.  Many
internally wanted it free-ware, and to sell the source.  Others wanted an
Enhydra Public License applied to the code.  During this indecision, the web
site said "ask us".  For what it's worth, I now receive upwards of 5 emails
a day from companies planning to redistribute the software as part of a
solution they've created.  And, with company like IBM Websphere and Nortel
doing this, it's not surprising that people are jumping on board.  We will
fix "A" probably around the time that we release source to IDB.  Right now,
we are so heads down on Enhydra Enterprise, which utilizes IDB at its core,
that we simply haven't been spending a lot of time updating the site.

The short answer to "B" is "We've been rearchitecting and perfecting IDB as
a service for use within Enhydra/Enhydra Enterprise, and until that work is
complete we're unlikely to release source."  That stated, I'm hoping to see
us accomplish this goal and release source to IDB in Q1/2001, which is when
I expect to see Enhydra Enterprise in bulletproof form on Enhydra.org as
well.  I should note, that while we're doing this work, it in no way
precludes your use of IDB with Websphere or any other application server /
development suite.  So, we're making progress, but we're not there yet.

The short answer to "C" is "No."  The long answer to "C" is "No, no reindeer
games.  I expect IDB source to be covered by the EPL."  The licensing of
XMLC was not about playing games, but about trying to ensure the code didn't
fork.  With EPL's current form, we're pretty certain that is unlikely to
happen.

I haven't 'vetted' any of these responses with our exec staff, so I'm not
going to swear that the dates are perfect or anything, but this is the
intent that I come to work with every day.

best regards,
Keith

Keith Bigelow
Director of Product Mgmt
Lutris Technologies       http://www.lutris.com
Sponsors of Enhydra    http://www.enhydra.org
831.460-7408
keith.bigelow@lutris.com


----- Original Message ----- From: Terry Steichen
<mailto:terry@net-frame.com>
To: Peter Hearty <mailto:peter.hearty@lutris.com>
Cc: instantDB@enhydra.org <mailto:instantDB@enhydra.org>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 9:28 AM
Subject: InstantDB: InstantDB's Licensing and Open Source Status
Hi Peter,
My curiosity is piqued on two points. The first pertains to InstantDB
licnesing. You've made it very clear in a coupleof recent e-mails that
anyone has the right to use and even redistribute InstantDB, as long as that
includes an acknowledgement of Lutris' ownership (and other small details).
However, on the web site, the official Lutris statement is "check with us
for licensing details". Why doesn't Lustris just update the website to be
consistent with your rather clear and unambiguous licensing explanation?
The second part of my curiosity pertains to open-source plans. Lutris (and
you) have stated that this is planned. Yet there are a number of folks who
have asked for more details and - curiously - their requests remains
unanswered (which is rather strange for this list). Why is that (or better,
what are Lutris' plans in this regard)?
Perhaps I'm a bit jaded by my memory of Lutris' strange initial effort to
shift XMLC away from open-source and into a proprietary status. For those
who were 'around' at that time, this created quite a furor, till Lutris
eventually backed off. I don't imagine anything like that is afoot, but a
little clarification would be most welcome.
Regards,
Terry Steichen

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to majordomo@enhydra.org
with the text "unsubscribe instantdb" in the body of the email.
If you have other questions regarding this mailing list, send email to
the list admin at owner-instantdb@enhydra.org.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to majordomo@enhydra.org
with the text "unsubscribe instantdb" in the body of the email.
If you have other questions regarding this mailing list, send email to
the list admin at owner-instantdb@enhydra.org.