directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Boreham <da...@bozemanpass.com>
Subject Re: [bdbje] [Licensing] Open Source verses Commercial Use
Date Mon, 25 Jul 2005 15:34:01 GMT
Mark Wilcox wrote:

>I don't think anyone is saying you should require  Sleepycat JE to use
>Apache DS - just make it an option. Then that shouldn't violate
>anyones license or principals unless you're going to be an idealogue
>and that's as limiting to innovation/adoption/community as any certain
>monopolistic company.
>  
>
I agree. But I'm not familiar with the Apache licensing thinking,
so my opinion doesn't count for much.

I do think that the Apache DS needs to 'work' with no database per se
(to handle cases like the LDAP Proxy and the NT4 Virtual Directory
we built for Fedora DS, for example). I'd prefer to see Apache DS's
core config stored in flat files, to remove any dependency on a database.

OTOH, I also think that JE would make a great backend database for
Apache DS when it's used in a 'traditional' LDAP server scenario: holding
its own data.

WFIW I don't like the idea of using a SQL-based shim layer such as
JDBC --- there's a significant impedance mismatch between the
requirements of an LDAP back end and SQL.



Mime
View raw message