First let me clarify just in case that I'm not suggesting that you are not saying that
Penrose uses ApacheDS.  I'm saying it would be nice to have a testimonial from
you guys :).

On 3/16/07, Jim Yang <jimyang@safehaus.org> wrote:

Penrose developers and contributors are well aware that Penrose
leverages Apache DS in our architecture as our LDAP listener. In fact,
it is listed in our FAQ ( http://docs.safehaus.org/display/PENROSE/FAQ)
for sometime now.

This is great and I knew about this already when you showed it to me a while back.

With the upcoming release of Penrose 1.2, we are adding support for
the other Open LDAP servers, such as OpenLDAP, OpenDS and Fedora DS.

That's good for Penrose but with the recent performance enhancements to ApacheDS
this might not be necessary for long :).

We, also, like to point out we don't use a straight GPL license to
allow interoperability with the other open source license. Please read
more here: http://docs.safehaus.org/display/PENROSE/FLOSS

That's great too ...

I just caught your add-on email ... We can link to this too.  Hey it's always good to
have more positive feedback on our site about ApacheDS.




On 3/15/07, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for doing so.  Sounds like CA is working on a VD solution based on
> ApacheDS much like Identyx (w/ Penrose) is working on one.  Would be good to
> at least have some testimonials from both camps.  There's a lot of products
> out there that use ApacheDS in one way or another.  It would be nice if more
> of them revealed that.
> Alex
> On 3/15/07, Norval Hope <nrhope@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm happy to assist as like AD and really appreciate having been able to
> use it as a base in my day job. However, the degree to which I can
> contribute is limitted by some factors:
> >   1. I'm flat out busy at the moment on the releases of my day job project
> >   2. My employer (CA) is very sensitive about the IP of our current
> solution built on top of AD, and to avoid conflict of interest they've said
> they don't mind me sharing broad-brush insights and findings but want me to
> tread very carefully when it comes to coding and detailed design, especially
> in areas outside of enhancing the AD core framework itself to make it more
> VD friendly.
> >
> > Hence I may be of some use as a "domain consultant" (for whatever my
> personal experience is worth) but less so as a major VD developer as such.
> Just thought I should put my cards on the table and make the situation
> clear.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Norval