Search Results

Search found 541 results on 22 pages for 'licenses licx'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 6/22 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • How to do Grouping using JPA annotation with mapping given field

    - by hemal
    I am using JPA Annotation mapping with the table given below, but having problem that i am doing mapping on same table but on diffrent field given ProductImpl.java @Entity @Table(name = "Product") public class ProductImpl extends SimpleTagGroup implements Product { @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY) private long id = -1; @OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL) @JoinTable(name = "ProductTagMapping", joinColumns =@JoinColumn(name = "productId"), inverseJoinColumns =@JoinColumn(name = "tagId")) private List<SimpleTag> tags; @OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL) @JoinTable(name = "ProductTagMapping", joinColumns =@JoinColumn(name = "productId"), inverseJoinColumns =@JoinColumn(name = "tagId")) private List<SimpleTag> licenses; @OneToMany(fetch = FetchType.EAGER, cascade = CascadeType.ALL) @JoinTable(name = "ProductTagMapping", joinColumns =@JoinColumn(name = "productId"), inverseJoinColumns =@JoinColumn(name = "tagId")) private List<SimpleTag> os; I want to get values like windows and linux in os , GPLv2 and GPLv3 in licenses ,so we are using TagGroup table . but here i got all tagValues in each of the os,licenses and tag fileds,so how could i do group by or some other things with JPA. and ProductTagMapping is the mapping table between Tag and TagGroup TagGroup Table ID TAGGROUPNAME 1 PRODUCTTYPE 2 LICENSE 3 TAGS 4 OS SimpleTag ID TAGVALUE 1 Application 2 Framework 3 Apache2 4 GPLv2 5 GPLv3 6 learning 7 Linux 8 Windows 9 mature

    Read the article

  • Open Source: Why not release into Public Domain?

    - by Goosey
    I have recently been wondering why so little code is ever released as 'Public Domain'. MIT and BSD licenses are becoming extremely popular and practically only have the restriction of license propagation. The reasons I can think of so far are: Credit - aka Prestige, Street-cred, 'Props', etc. Authors don't want usage of the code restricted, but they also want credit for creating the code. Two problems with this reason. I have seen projects copy/paste the MIT or BSD license without adding the 'Copyright InsertNameHere' thereby making it a tag-along license that doesn't give them credit. I have talked to authors who say they don't care about people giving them credit, they just want people to use their code. Public Domain would make it easier for people to do so. License Change - IANAL, but I believe by licensing their code, even with an extremely nonrestrictive license, this means they can change the license on a later revision? This reason is not good for explaining most BSD/MIT licensed code which seems to have no intent of ever becoming more restrictive. AS IS - All licenses seem to have the SCREAMING CAPS declaration saying that the software is 'as is' and that the author offers no implied or express warranty. IANAL, but isn't this implied in public domain? Am I missing some compelling reason? The authors I have talked to about this basically said something along the lines of "BSD/MIT just seems like what you do, no one does public domain". Is this groupthink in action, or is there a compelling anti-public domain argument? Thanks EDIT: I am specifically asking about Public Domain vs BSD/MIT/OtherEquallyUnrestrictiveLicense. Not GPL. Please understand what these licenses allow, and this includes: Selling the work, changing the work and not 'giving the changes back', and incorporating the work in a differently (such as commercially) licensed work. Thank You to everyone who has replied who understands what BSD/MIT means.

    Read the article

  • Developer friendly open-source license?

    - by Francisco Garcia
    As a software engineer/programmer myself, I love the possibility to download the code and learn from it. However building software is what brings food to my table. I have doubts regarding the type of license I should use for my own personal projects or when picking up one project to learn from. There are already many questions about licenses on Stackoverflow, but I would like to make this one much more specific. If your main profession and way of living is building software, which type of license do you find more useful for you? And I mean, the license that can benefit you most as a professional because it gives you more freedom to reuse the experience you gain. GPL is a great license to build communities because it forces you to give back your work. However I like BSD licenses because of their extra freedom. I know that if the code I am exploring is BSD licensed, I might be able to expand not only my skills, but also my programmer toolbox. Whenever I am working for a company, I might recall that something similar was done in another project and I will be able to copy or imitate certain part of the code. I know that there are religious wars regarding GPL vs BSD and it is not my intention to start one. Probably many companies already take snipsets from GPL projects anyway. I just want to insist in the factor of professional enrichment. I do not intend to discriminate any license. I said I prefer BSD licenses but I also use Linux because the user base is bigger and also the market demand.

    Read the article

  • Error using 'send_file' for ruby/rails - help appreciated

    - by user1653279
    I am trying to create a link to download a file from the file system. For this, I define the following in the "license_helper.rb" file: def license_download_link(license, link_text = nil) if link_text.blank? link_text = image_tag("download_icon.png", :border => 0, :width => 32, :height =>32, :alt => 'Download License', :title => 'Download License') end tempLicenseFile = "tempLicense.xml" File.open("#{tempLicenseFile}", 'w') do |tf| tf.puts license.data end command = "./runLicenseEncoder.bat #{tempLicenseFile}" generateEncryptedLicenseFile = `#{command}` theLicenseFile = "license.xml" link_to link_text, "license/download" end My "view" just calls this helper class: <td><%= license_download_link(license, ' ') %></td> In the 'routes.rb' file, I have defined the following: map.licensedownload "license.xml", :controller = 'licenses', :action = 'download' map.download "/licenses/download", :controller = 'licenses', :action = 'download' In the 'controller', I have 'licenses_controller.rb' which includes the following: def download theLicense = @license licenseFileName = "license.xml" send_file "#{licenseFileName}" , :type => "application/xml", :filename => "#{licenseFileName}" end However, I am unable to obtain the '@license' attribute from the database in the controller. Could someone please let me know what I am doing wrong here and why I am unable to get the value for "@license". Thanks for your time, Regards, --- AJ

    Read the article

  • Hyper-V Deployment Options Best Practices

    - by Erv Walter
    In what circumstances would you choose each of the following deployment options: Hyper-V installed as the bare bones Windows Hyper-V Server 2008 R2 Hyper-V role installed on a Windows Server 2008 R2 Server Core installation Hyper-V role installed on a Windows Server 2008 R2 Full Installation For example, I know there are licensing considerations for each option: With Hyper-V on top of a full installation of Enterprise or Data Center edition, you can use Windows Server as a guest OS without needing additional licenses (4 for Enterprise, unlimited for Data Center) With "Windows Hyper-V Server" you have to obtain licenses for each guest OS. But my real question is, are there technical considerations as well? I understand that the Full Installation doesn't perform as well as the other two options, but is there a significant difference between Server Core and "Windows Hyper-V Server"? What are the pros and cons of Hyper-V on Server Core vs "Windows Hyper-V Server" and when would you choose each?

    Read the article

  • Copyrights concerning code snippets and larger amounts of code

    - by JustcallmeDrago
    I am designing a public code repository. Users will be allowed to post and edit whatever amount of code they want, from code snippets to entire multi-file projects. I have a few major legal concerns about this: Not getting sued/shut down - I feel the site would be a much easier target than tracking down an individual user to sue. I have looked around a bit and see links to legal info in the footer of each page is common. What specific things should I do--and what does does a site such as YouTube (which I see copyrighted material on all the time) do--for protection? Citing sources and editing sourced code - If a user wants to post code that isn't theirs, what concerns/safeguards should I have? Will a link suffice, and what do I need further to allow the code to be edited (to improve it for example)? What can happen if a user posts copyrighted code without citing it? Large chunks of code - What legal differences should I look out for as the amount grows? Not having a mess of licenses for the site - I would like to have a single license (like RosettaCode) that keeps things simple for interaction on the site. I want the code to be postable and editable. I have looked into StackOverflow's CreativeCommons license a little and it says that If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one. And on RosettaCode: All software found on Rosetta Code should be considered potentially hazardous. Use at your own risk. Be aware that all code on Rosetta Code is under the GNU Free Documentation License, as are any edits made by contributors. See Rosetta Code:Copyrights for details. What other licenses are like this? Commercializing the site - In what ways can I and can't I make money off of a site that contains code like this? All code will be publicly visible. Initial thoughts are having ads or making money by charging for advanced features.

    Read the article

  • Does it matter to you that a software is "available source" but not "open source"

    - by ccpod
    You probably know the list of open source licenses officially approved by the OSI. Most notably I guess would be the GPL, MIT, [insert your favorite license here]. I recently ran into a project which although was open source (the creator made all source code available), was not officially open source under one of those official licenses. It released the source, but made no promise to release the source in the future. It allowed modification suggestions, but made no promises to accept patches and disallowed external distribution of externally-patched versions. It allowed the use of the software in commercial or paid projects, but disallowed the sale of the software itself. I suppose it could be called "available source" not open source as we like to think of it. I can see why the management team of a company wouldn't want to do business with this software. They can't fork it, they can't sell it, they can't create their own version of the software and distribute it or sell it. But would it matter to you as part of a software engineering team who's just using this software? I can still get my work done with it, I can use it in a project for which I'm paid (but I can't sell the software itself, which I'm not in the business of doing anyway), and I can make changes to the code to make it behave differently for my needs (but I can't make those modifications public), and if I do want those modifications officially made available to others, the approval is up to the project itself and they choose whether to incorporate them in an official release or not. So we know that a company that wants to base its business on this "available source" software can't do that, but as someone from the software engineering team, would those differences matter to you or do they seem less relevant? Curious what others think of this.

    Read the article

  • Uganda .NET Usergroup meeting (February 2010)

    - by Malisa L. Ncube
    We had a very interesting .NET meeting in which i gave a short presentation on the new features of .NET 4.0 and Visual Studio 2010. The main presentation came from Jake Markhus @jmarkhus who talked about NHibernate (http://nhforge.org).   The membership for the group is growing each time we meet and its very encouraging. Some employers found candidates within our group for hiring, and this has resulted in a mutual benefit between the employers and job-seekers – really cool stuff.   Jake above giving us the soup and nuts of NHibernate. We were very excited since a number companies decided to support us in many ways. Some members won the licenses for Telerik Suite (http://www.telerik.com) while Intellisense LTD (http://www.intellisense.co.ug) agreed to sponsor us on domain registration and hosting of the community site. Jake announced on the possibility of having DevExpress (http://www.devexpress.com) sponsor us on 2 licenses of CodeRush http://www.devexpress.com/coderush which would be won in the next meeting raffle. I (@malisancube) would like to thank all the companies and individuals who have decided to sponsor us as a community of developers. We appreciate your support very much. You can download the presentations here Jan 2010 “VS2010 and NET 4.0” by Malisa Ncube. Feb 2010 “Using NHibernate” by Jake Markhus   Technorati Tags: Uganda .NET Usergroup,.NET 4.0,Community,NHibernate

    Read the article

  • Does it matter to you that a software is "available source" but not "open source"

    - by ccpod
    You probably know the list of open source licenses officially approved by the OSI. Most notably I guess would be the GPL, MIT, [insert your favorite license here]. I recently ran into a project which although was open source (the creator made all source code available), was not officially open source under one of those official licenses. It released the source, but made no promise to release the source in the future. It allowed modification suggestions, but made no promises to accept patches and disallowed external distribution of externally-patched versions. It allowed the use of the software in commercial or paid projects, but disallowed the sale of the software itself. I suppose it could be called "available source" not open source as we like to think of it. I can see why the management team of a company wouldn't want to do business with this software. They can't fork it, they can't sell it, they can't create their own version of the software and distribute it or sell it. But would it matter to you as part of a software engineering team who's just using this software? I can still get my work done with it, I can use it in a project for which I'm paid (but I can't sell the software itself, which I'm not in the business of doing anyway), and I can make changes to the code to make it behave differently for my needs (but I can't make those modifications public), and if I do want those modifications officially made available to others, the approval is up to the project itself and they choose whether to incorporate them in an official release or not. So we know that a company that wants to base its business on this "available source" software can't do that, but as someone from the software engineering team, would those differences matter to you or do they seem less relevant? Curious what others think of this.

    Read the article

  • Office 365 Powershell - Export user, license type, and company field to csv file

    - by ASGJim
    I need to be able to export user name or email address (doesn't matter which), company (from the company field under the organization tab in a user account of the exchange admin console), and license type (e.g. exchange online e1, exchange online kiosk etc...) I am able to export both values in two statements into two separate files but that doesn't do me much good. I can export the username and license type with the following: Get-MSOLUser | % { $user=$_; $_.Licenses | Select {$user.displayname},AccountSKuid } | Export-CSV "sample.csv" -NoTypeInformation And, I can get the company values with the following: Get-User | select company | Export-CSV sample.csv Someone on another forum suggested this - $index = @{} Get-User | foreach-object {$index.Add($_.userprincipalname,$_.company)} Get-MsolUser | ForEach-Object { write-host $_.userprincipalname, $index[$_.userprincipalname], $_.licenses.AccountSku.Skupartnumber} That seems like it should work but it doesn't display any license info in my powershell, it's just blank. Also I wouldn't know how to export that to a csv file. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Difference between BES SBE and Express?

    - by DaveJohnston
    Can anyone tell me what the difference is between the BES epxress and small business edition is? From what I have read they are both identical in capabilities and also both have a 15 user limit. But the BES express edition is free and comes with 1 user license and SBE costs about £800 but comes with 5 user licenses. Buying a 5 user CAL pack costs about £350 (from what I have seen). So if there is no difference why would anyone buy the SBE when they could get the Express edition free and just add 5 more licenses for about £350? Is there any fundamental difference between express and SBE?

    Read the article

  • Meta-licensing of applications

    - by Gene
    I'm currently evaluating license management solutions for our customized and project-based applications, which are supported by a single server in the intranet of the customer. The applications use common functionality provided by the server (session handling, data synchronization, management capabilities, etc) and are installed on mobile devices. We allow our customers to run the applications on X devices and want to check on the server, whether the customer sticks to this limit (based on the sessions). We don't want licensing software to be installed on the devices itself (for example providing X serials to the customer) nor do we want to host an additional server for licensing in the intranet of the customer. If a client connects, our server should load the license for the application running on the client and verify, that there are sessions left. The licensing managers I looked at (12 products so far) focus on the application itself and don't allow me to implement such a floating behavior as described above. For example, this software could easily be used to create a "Standard Edition" or a "Professional Edition" of our server software, which is not our intention. In XHEO DeployLX there is a "Session Limit", which allows to limit the license to the currently established sessions in ASP.NET, which comes very close to my needs. I'm currently thinking of implementing a custom solution, which allows me to load and enforce custom-defined licenses per application on the server-side and a simple editor to define such licenses (which would contain a type and the limit itself), but I would appreciate an existing, easy to integrate commercial solution. I think it could be possible to use DeployLX for this task, but I would spend a lot of money for implementing most of the solution myself (except for the editor). Thanks in advance for any suggestions or hints. Gene

    Read the article

  • Which version of Windows Server 2008?

    - by dragonmantank
    One of the projects I'm working on is looking like we're going to need to migrate from CentOS 5.4 over to something else (we need to run Postgresql 8.3+, and CentOS/RHEL only support 8.1), and one of the options will be Windows Server. Since 2008 R2 is out that's what I'm looking at. I'll need to run Postgres and Tomcat and don't really require anything that Windows has like IIS (if I can run Server Core, even better!). The other kicker is it will be virtualized through VMWare ESXI 4.0 so that we have three separate boxes: development, Quality, and Production servers. From a licensing standpoint though, and I good enough with just the Web Server edition? Am I right in assuming that will be three licenses? Or should I just jump up to Enterprise so that I get 4 VM licenses?

    Read the article

  • General questions regarding open-source licensing

    - by ndg
    I'm looking to release an open-source iOS software project but I'm very new to the licensing side of the things. While I'm aware that the majority of answers here will not lawyers, I'd appreciate it if anyone could steer me in the right direction. With the exception of the following requirements I'm happy for developers to largely do whatever they want with the projects source code. I'm not interested in any copyleft licensing schemes, and while I'd like to encourage attribution in derivative works it is not required. As such, my requirements are as follows: Original source can be distributed and re-distributed (verbatim) both commercially and non-commercially as long as the original copyright information, website link and license is maintained. I wish to retain rights to any of the multi-media distributed as part of the project (sound effects, graphics, logo marks, etc). Such assets will be included to allow other developers to easily execute the project, but cannot be re-distributed in any manner. I wish to retain rights to the applications name and branding. Futher to selecting an applicable license, I have the following questions: The project makes use of a number of third-party libraries (all licensed under variants of the MIT license). I've included individual licenses within the source (and application) and believe I've met all requirements expressed in these licenses, but is there anything else that needs to be done before distributing them as part of my open-source project? Also included in my project is a single proprietary, close-sourced library that's used to power a small part of the application. I'm obviously unable to include this in the source release, but what's the best way of handling this? Should I simply weak-link the project and exclude it entirely from the Git project?

    Read the article

  • Backup software for Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise with 4 virtual machines (Exchange, SQL, AD, SharePoint)

    - by MadBoy
    What are the options for backup software for: HOST - Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise with HyperV VIRTUAL - Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise with Exchange 2010 VIRTUAL - Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise with SQL Express / SharePoint VIRTUAL - Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise with Terminal Services (10 users working on it) VIRTUAL - Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise with AD/DNS What I'm looking at is possibility of having an offsite backup thru FTP, maybe copy to usb/esata/lan drives for easy taking backup data outside of company. What I've been looking at: - Symantec Exec Backup 2010 System Recovery has an offsite backup but I would need 5 licenses and it doesn't have granular recovery. - Symantec Exec Backup 2010 seems OK but a bit expensive - Microsoft DPM 2010 requires full SQL Standard and for each machine I would need 4 Enterprise licenses. But does it allow Offsite backup without need for additional license and server outside of company (for doing DPM backup of DPM). What other options? This is 10 people company and so the costs matter but also convenience and security. Offsite backup is requirement.

    Read the article

  • How can I decrease relevancy of Creative Commons footer text? (In Google Webmaster Tools)

    - by anonymous coward
    I know that I may just have to link the image to make this happen, but I figured it was worth asking, just in case there's some other semantic markup or tips I could use... I have a site that uses the textual Creative Commons blurb in the footer. The markup is like so: <div class="footer"> <!-- snip --> <!-- Creative Commons License --> <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/80x15.png" /></a><br />This work by <a xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="http://www.xmemphisx.com/" property="cc:attributionName" rel="cc:attributionURL">xMEMPHISx.com</a> is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/">Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License</a>. <!-- /Creative Commons License --> </div> Within Google Webmaster Tools, the list of relevant keywords is heavily saturated with the text from that blurb. For instance, 50% of my top-ten most relevant keywords (including the site name): [site name] license [keyword] commons creative [keyword] alike [keyword] attribution [keyword] I have not done any extensive testing to find out rather or not this list even matters, and so far this doesn't impact performance in any way. The site is well designed for humans, and it is as findable as it needs to be at the moment. But, out of mostly curiosity: Do you have any tips for decreasing the relevancy of the text from the Creative Commons footer blurb?

    Read the article

  • Open source license with backlink requirement

    - by KajMagnus
    I'm developing a Javascript library, and I'm thinking about releasing it under an open source license (e.g. GPL, BSD, MIT) — but that requires that websites that use the software link back to my website. Do you know about any such licenses? And how have they formulated the attribution part of the license text? Do you think this BSD-license would do what you think that I want? (I suppose it doesn't :-)) [...] 3. Each website that redistributes this work must include a visible rel=follow link to my-website.example.com, reachable via rel=follow links from each page where the software is being redistributed. (For example, you could have a link back to your homepage, and from your homepage to an About-Us section, which could link to a Credits section) I realize that some companies wouldn't want to use the library because of legal issues with interpreting non-standard licenses (have a look at this answer: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/156859/54906). — After half a year, or perhaps some years, I'd change the license to plain GPL + MIT.

    Read the article

  • How does trilicense (mpl,gpl,lgpl) work when you want to use it on public website

    - by tomok
    I have tried to search for this answer for quite some time and I have gone through all the various FAQ's and documentation regarding the three licenses; but none of them have been able to answer a question that I have. So I've been working an idea for a website for sometime now and recently I found open source software that has many of components that are similar. It is licensed under the mpl/gpl/lgpl licenses. I think for the most part I understand the ramifications, due to the searches and reading, of what is required if I modify/use and want to distribute the software. But what if I want to modify and not distribute, but use it on a public website that I generate ad revenue from? Is this illegal? It doesn't seem like it is from reading other open source system, say like Drupal, where they allow you to use the software but it's not considered "distribution" if people just go to the website. I know this site may not be the best resource and I've tried some other sites, but I haven't received any clear replies back. If you know some other resource that I could contact also, please let me know. Links for those who don't know: MPL - Wikipedia, Legalese GPL - Wikipedia, Legalese LGPL - Wikipedia, Legalese

    Read the article

  • Software licensing template that gives room for restricting usage to certain industries/uses of software/source

    - by BSara
    *Why this question is not a duplicate of the questions specified as such: I did not ask if there was a license that restricted specific uses and I did not ask if I could rewrite every line of any open source project. I asked very specifically: "Does there exist X? If not, can I Y with Z?". As far as I can tell, the two questions that were specified as duplicates do not answer my specific question. Please remove the duplicate status placed on the question. I'm developing some software that I would like to be "semi" open source. I would like to allow for anyone to use my software/source unless they are using the software/source for certain purposes. For example, I don't want to allow usage of the software/source if it is being used to create, distribute, view or otherwise support pornography, illegal purposes, etc. I'm no lawyer and couldn't ever hope to write a license myself nor do I have to time to figure how to best do this. My question is this: Does there exist a freely available license or a template for a license that I can use to license my software under they conditions explained above just like one can use the Creative Commons licenses? If not, am I allowed to just alter one of Creative Commons licenses to meet my needs?

    Read the article

  • Picking the right license

    - by nightcracker
    Hey, I have some trouble with picking the right license for my works. I have a few requirements: Not copyleft like the GNU (L)GPL and allows for redistribution under other licenses Allows other people to redistribute your (modified) work but prevents that other people freely make money off my work (they need to ask/buy a commercial license if they want to) Compatible with the GNU (L)GPL Not responsible for any damage caused by my work Now, I wrote my own little license based on the BSD and CC Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 licenses, but I am not sure if it will hold in court. Copyright <year> <copyright holder>. All rights reserved. Redistribution of this work, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: 1. All redistributions must attribute <copyright holder> as the original author or licensor of this work (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). 2. All redistributions must be for non-commercial purposes and free of charge unless specific written permission by <copyright holder> is given. This work is provided by <copyright holder> "as is" and any express or implied warranties are disclaimed. <copyright holder> is not liable for any damage arising in any way out of the use of this work. Now, you could help me by either: Point me to an existing license which is satisfies my requirements Confirm that my license has no major flaws and most likely would hold in court Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Asterisk failing at startup after upgrading to asterisk18

    - by Supratik
    I was using asterisk16 and asterisk16-skypeforasterisk, which was working fine. I have recently upgraded to asterisk18 and asterisk18-skypeforasterisk, after that I am receiving the following error message. Asterisk ended with exit status 1 Asterisk died with code 1. Asterisk could not start! Use 'tail /var/log/asterisk/full' to find out why. When I checked the log I got the following messages. codec_g729a.c: == Found total of 11 G.729 licenses translate.c: empty buf size, you need to supply one Now, if I remove the /var/lib/asterisk/licenses folder it works fine. Can you please tell me what could be the issue here ? Warm Regards Supratik

    Read the article

  • What version of Windows Server 2008 to Get

    - by dragonmantank
    One of the projects I'm working on is looking like we're going to need to migrate from CentOS 5.4 over to something else (we need to run Postgresql 8.3+, and CentOS/RHEL only support 8.1), and one of the options will be Windows Server. Since 2008 R2 is out that's what I'm looking at. I'll need to run Postgres and Tomcat and don't really require anything that Windows has like IIS (if I can run Server Core, even better!). The other kicker is it will be virtualized through VMWare ESXI 4.0 so that we have three separate boxes: development, Quality, and Production servers. From a licensing standpoint though, and I good enough with just the Web Server edition? Am I right in assuming that will be three licenses? Or should I just jump up to Enterprise so that I get 4 VM licenses?

    Read the article

  • Google SketchUp network licensing issue

    - by Larry G. Wapnitsky
    We have 10 licenses for Google SketchUp in my local office. We store the license file on a network drive that is accessible to all users. We've been finding that, at most, only 3 or 4 people can run it at one time before the license shows up as "expired" on another user's system. I've verified with Google that we have 10 licenses, and have downloaded updated license files from them. The only thing that I can think of is that sometimes SketchUp crashes. Could this be utilizing a license somehow without giving it up? Google has not been able to answer this question.

    Read the article

  • Sun Ray Hardware Last Order Dates & Extension of Premier Support for Desktop Virtualization Software

    - by Adam Hawley
    In light of the recent announcement  to end new feature development for Oracle Virtual Desktop Infrastructure Software (VDI), Oracle Sun Ray Software (SRS), Oracle Virtual Desktop Client (OVDC) Software, and Oracle Sun Ray Client hardware (3, 3i, and 3 Plus), there have been questions and concerns regarding what this means in terms of customers with new or existing deployments.  The following updates clarify some of these commonly asked questions. Extension of Premier Support for Software Though there will be no new feature additions to these products, customers will have access to maintenance update releases for Oracle Virtual Desktop Infrastructure and Sun Ray Software, including Oracle Virtual Desktop Client and Sun Ray Operating Software (SROS) until Premier Support Ends.  To ensure that customer investments for these products are protected, Oracle  Premier Support for these products has been extended by 3 years to following dates: Sun Ray Software - November 2017 Oracle Virtual Desktop Infrastructure - March 2017 Note that OVDC support is also extended to the above dates since OVDC is licensed by default as part the SRS and VDI products.   As a reminder, this only affects the products listed above.  Oracle Secure Global Desktop and Oracle VM VirtualBox will continue to be enhanced with new features from time-to-time and, as a result, they are not affected by the changes detailed in this message. The extension of support means that customers under a support contract will still be able to file service requests through Oracle Support, and Oracle will continue to provide the utmost level of support to our customers as expected,  until the published Premier Support end date.  Following the end of Premier Support, Sustaining Support remains an 'indefinite' period of time.   Sun Ray 3 Series Clients - Last Order Dates For Sun Ray Client hardware, customers can continue to purchase Sun Ray Client devices until the following last order dates: Product Marketing Part Number Last Order Date Last Ship Date Sun Ray 3 Plus TC3-P0Z-00, TC3-PTZ-00 (TAA) September 13, 2013 February 28, 2014 Sun Ray 3 Client TC3-00Z-00 February 28, 2014 August 31, 2014 Sun Ray 3i Client TC3-I0Z-00 February 28, 2014 August 31, 2014 Payflex Smart Cards X1403A-N, X1404A-N February 28, 2014 August 31, 2014 Note the difference in the Last Order Date for the Sun Ray 3 Plus (September 13, 2013) compared to the other products that have a Last Order Date of February 28, 2014. The rapidly approaching date for Sun Ray 3 Plus is due to a supplier phasing-out production of a key component of the 3 Plus.   Given September 13 is unfortunately quite soon, we strongly encourage you to place your last time buy as soon as possible to maximize Oracle's ability fulfill your order. Keep in mind you can schedule shipments to be delivered as late as the end of February 2014, but the last day to order is September 13, 2013. Customers wishing to purchase other models - Sun Ray 3 Clients and/or Sun Ray 3i Clients - have additional time (until February 28, 2014) to assess their needs and to allow fulfillment of last time orders.  Please note that availability of supply cannot be absolutely guaranteed up to the last order dates and we strongly recommend placing last time buys as early as possible.  Warranty replacements for Sun Ray Client hardware for customers covered by Oracle Hardware Systems Support contracts will be available beyond last order dates, per Oracle's policy found on Oracle.com here.  Per that policy, Oracle intends to provide replacement hardware for up to 5 years beyond the last ship date, but hardware may not be available beyond the 5 year period after the last ship date for reasons beyond Oracle's control. In any case, by design, Sun Ray Clients have an extremely long lifespan  and mean time between failures (MTBF) - much longer than PCs, and over the years we have continued to see first- and second generations of Sun Rays still in daily use.  This is no different for the Sun Ray 3, 3i, and 3 Plus.   Because of this, and in addition to Oracle's continued support for SRS, VDI, and SROS, Sun Ray and Oracle VDI deployments can continue to expand and exist as a viable solution for some time in the future. Continued Availability of Product Licenses and Support Oracle will continue to offer all existing software licenses, and software and hardware support including: Product licenses and Premier Support for Sun Ray Software and Oracle Virtual Desktop Infrastructure Premier Support for Operating Systems (for Sun Ray Operating Software maintenance upgrades/support)  Premier Support for Systems (for Sun Ray Operating Software maintenance upgrades/support and hardware warranty) Support renewals For More Information For more information, please refer to the following documents for specific dates and policies associated with the support of these products: Document 1478170.1 - Oracle Desktop Virtualization Software and Hardware Lifetime Support Schedule Document 1450710.1 - Sun Ray Client Hardware Lifetime schedule Document 1568808.1 - Document Support Policies for Discontinued Oracle Virtual Desktop Infrastructure, Sun Ray Software and Hardware and Oracle Virtual Desktop Client Development For Sales Orders and Questions Please contact your Oracle Sales Representative or Saurabh Vijay ([email protected])

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >