Mailing-List: contact directory-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List"
 <directory-dev@incubator.apache.org>
From: "Alex Karasulu" <aok123@bellsouth.net>
To: "'Apache Directory Developers List'" <directory-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: RE: [eve] Event Manager
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 22:46:13 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <200312051001.27665.wmckean@logictrends.com>
Thread-Index: AcO7QNCvVczvnSN3RV+Q0/S5bOyNnQAanDpw
Message-Id: <20031206034616.BHVF1942.imf23aec.mail.bellsouth.net@franklin>

Don't worry Wes this is totally due to the fact that 
the ball has started rolling and everything is new.  I
also am trying to get as much information out to people
as possible so just everyone has the knowledge to hack 
the code.

It will slow down soon.

Alex


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wes McKean [mailto:wmckean@logictrends.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 10:01 AM
> To: Apache Directory Developers List
> Subject: Re: [eve] Event Manager
> 
> Unfortunately, this list is already generating tons of mail, and I just
> don't
> have the time to read it as thoroughly as I like :-)  If you, Alex, or
> Vince
> already has stuff done, then by all means, let's use it.  I don't want to
> re-invent the wheel more than three times.
> 
> Wes
> 
> On Thursday 04 December 2003 11:51 pm, Alex Karasulu wrote:
> > I'm a little dense.  It's cool I don't mind reworking it
> > and I'm sure Wes would like that.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 11:43 PM
> > > To: Apache Directory Developers List
> > > Subject: RE: [eve] Event Manager
> > >
> > > > In the beginning I thought it was do-able since the project uses
> > > > the Apache license and all the members were Apache people or about
> > > > to be Apache people but I should stop presuming things.
> > >
> > > Actually, I read Brian's message as saying that because they used the
> > > Apache
> > > license without changing the name, we could use it.  Also, if all of
> the
> > > people had signed CLAs (or do sign), we'd be fine, too.  The exposure
> > > would
> > > be from someone who contributed code without a CLA, and then decides
> to
> > >
> > > complain later.  As Brian said:
> > > > Therefore: if the license on d-haven really is either the Apache
> > > > License or a name-replaced equivalent, it is not mandatory to get
> CLAs
> > > > from
> > >
> > > every
> > >
> > > > contributor.  It is *preferred* that we get those, so as to provide
> a
> > > > second layer of defense should anyone make noise about it.
> > >
> > > So your example above would allow re-use.
> > >
> > > 	--- Noel