On Dec 10, 2008, at 8:05 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Dec 10, 2008, at 4:51 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Dec 9, 2008, at 4:56 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
It's unfortunate there's no clear copyright statement, but would it
not be reasonable to assume Copyright Pan Qingfeng and deal with
him?
On Dec 9, 2008, at 4:56 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
It's unfortunate there's no clear copyright statement, but would it
not be reasonable to assume Copyright Pan Qingfeng and deal with him?
Contact other contributors as a courtesy, but not let it worry us if
some of them prove uncontactable, only if
On Dec 10, 2008, at 4:51 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Dec 9, 2008, at 4:56 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
It's unfortunate there's no clear copyright statement, but would it
not be reasonable to assume Copyright Pan Qingfeng and deal with him?
Contact other contributors as a courtesy, but not let it worry
Hi --
As Paul Querna noted recently, some folks are using mod_fcgid
these days instead of mod_fastcgi, in part because it was (I believe)
the first of the two to work with httpd 2.2. Unfortunately, the
original developer of mod_fcgid, Pan Qingfeng, has largely moved on
to other things.
He
On Dec 9, 2008, at 1:30 PM, Chris Darroch wrote:
One key question I have (jumping ahead a little) is whether
everyone who has contributed a patch to the project needs to contacted
and a signed contributor agreement recovered from them. If not,
then I
would think that we'd just need a CLA
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Dec 9, 2008, at 1:30 PM, Chris Darroch wrote:
One key question I have (jumping ahead a little) is whether
everyone who has contributed a patch to the project needs to contacted
and a signed contributor agreement recovered from them. If not, then I
would think that
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
If the *original* code dates to Open Market's implementation, we need to
use some caution. The original license was very restrictive. The current
mod_fastcgi license is much less restrictive;
Open Market permits you to use, copy, modify, distribute, and
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Dec 9, 2008, at 1:30 PM, Chris Darroch wrote:
One key question I have (jumping ahead a little) is whether
everyone who has contributed a patch to the project needs to contacted
and a signed contributor agreement recovered from them. If not,
Hi,
Chris Darroch wrote:
Hi --
As Paul Querna noted recently, some folks are using mod_fcgid
these days instead of mod_fastcgi, in part because it was (I believe)
the first of the two to work with httpd 2.2. Unfortunately, the
original developer of mod_fcgid, Pan Qingfeng, has largely
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
The mod_fastcgi implementation has the following terms;
Open Market permits you to use, copy, modify, distribute, and license
this Software and the Documentation solely for the purpose of
implementing the FastCGI specification defined by Open Market or
Chris Darroch wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
The mod_fastcgi implementation has the following terms;
Open Market permits you to use, copy, modify, distribute, and license
this Software and the Documentation solely for the purpose of
implementing the FastCGI specification defined
On Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:30:54 -0800
Chris Darroch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He and I have been in touch lately about long-term maintenance
of mod_fcgid. (We've helped by a colleague of mine who can translate
fluently between Chinese and English, although Pan Qingfeng's English
is quite good
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 21:56:43 +
Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have a complete list of people who have made nontrivial
contributions, such that their IP might be affected?
Ignore that - I meant to chop those lines when I read (as opposed
to skimmed) the following paragraphs.
13 matches
Mail list logo
