> You have a corporate viewpoint of how Apache's relationship with Sun > should be managed. I tend to think letting them know is fine. (Somehow > any explanation of this would probably start sounding like the cluetrain > manifesto...which I never read because it was too long winded, but > whatever).. Let them decide based on the merits on whether they want to > continue their association.. >
Not meaning to pick on you Andrew but this comment really made me feel i had to respond. Sun has a long standing relationship with the ASF, one that has taken alot of time to build, as well as contributed alot either way with regards to both code and community development. I would hate to see a situation where just one person could destroy that relationship.. and the above comment suggests that you don't really understand [the benefits of] the ASF's association with Sun. whilst i support in general a "people.apache.org" style structure similar to people.netscape.com and similar, just reading Jamie Zawinski's various rants about what happens when you make a comment about another company (read, partner) in your private space -- if it's possible to trace that you are an apache guy, even if it's obscure, then that is bad. This is an area where you have to be especially careful, and the first amendment argument doesn't really work here. If i were able to, i'd veto this on grounds that it'd be too difficult to maintain -- and get this -- people should be using their own web-domains and httpd/forrest/etc to get them working ! -- james
