On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote: > On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:51 PM, <robert_w...@us.ibm.com> wrote: >> Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote on 06/05/2011 06:30:06 >> PM: >> >>> >>> I agree with you - in this case I think it would be better if IBM >>> collaborated with LibreOffice, rather than seeking to compete. But I >>> could be wrong. >>> >> >> And I support 100% your right to have that opinion and to support whatever >> open source project or projects you want, to worship your own God and to >> drink the beer of your choice. But if there are a "sufficient" number of >> people (as determined subjectively by the IPMC) who have a different >> opinion, and who would like to do an open source project at Apache, and >> they have a proposal acceptable in other ways, then I think it should be >> allowed. >> >> Otherwise this is like the Baptists telling the Methodists that they >> cannot have a church of their own in town, because the Baptists want to >> recruit a larger choir. > > It is clear from IBM switching its efforts from Harmony to OpenJDK > that there are no religious reasons over license. Other ASF people > have expressed in this thread that in their opinion that is reason > enough (and I respect that view) - but IBM can't claim that. So I > think my point still stands.
I seriously doubt IBM "switched" to the license OpenJDK is under. Instead, I'd guess they got a proprietary license from Oracle so they could continue to ship their JDK on AIX. They cannot do that in many other cases. Of course, if you can find the source for IBM's JDK implementation then that would prove me wrong. Ralph --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
