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

CVS Repositories

Who We Are
News, Articles & Events
Getting Involved
Contact Us

Case Studies
On The Edge! -NEW-
Commercial Vendors

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

InstantDB: Re: InstantDB's Licensing and Open Source Status


Thanks for the detailed reply.  Good answers all.

One more question: What do I have to do if I want to distribute InstantDB
today with a product I create (opensource, freeware or commercial)?



----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Bigelow" <>
To: <>; <>;
Cc: "Paul Morgan (E-mail)" <>; "Greg Schwarzer
(E-mail)" <>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 10:34 AM

> 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
> 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
> site said "ask us".  For what it's worth, I now receive upwards of 5
> 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
> we are so heads down on Enhydra Enterprise, which utilizes IDB at its
> 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
> a service for use within Enhydra/Enhydra Enterprise, and until that work
> complete we're unlikely to release source."  That stated, I'm hoping to
> us accomplish this goal and release source to IDB in Q1/2001, which is
> I expect to see Enhydra Enterprise in bulletproof form on 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
> 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
> 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
> Sponsors of Enhydra
> 831.460-7408
> ----- Original Message ----- From: Terry Steichen
> <>
> To: Peter Hearty <>
> Cc: <>
> 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
> includes an acknowledgement of Lutris' ownership (and other small
> 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
> 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
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