On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka <c...@lippka.com> wrote: > > While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word) correct my > understanding is that missing bits could still be provided if requested. But > this must be answered by people who are making the negotiations.
I'll share my understanding. My first input was that any incubator proposal that was not accompanied by a substantial software grant would not get serious consideration. After a serious of miscommunications on both (ASF and Oracle's) sides I got on the phone directly with the Oracle VP driving this, and said that all we needed at this time was a substantial list to start from. If we needed more, we could discuss that later. This was approximately noon EDT on 31 May. After discussions with lawyers and collection of a list of files, the Software Grant was sent via email at 8:50PM PDT the same day. Others with no association to either IBM or Oracle can verify this basic timeline. My best guess is that while the list may be incomplete, it contains only files that Oracle could determine with absolutely certainty under incredible time pressure that they have the necessary rights to include a standard ASF software grant. While Oracle has absolutely no obligation to produce anything more, and people are welcome to factor that into their decisions once this comes up to a vote, nothing I have seen has indicated that anybody at Oracle is operating in anything other than good faith. It is my expectation that if we make reasonable requests and that if those requests are within Oracle's power to fulfill those requests, that we will obtain subsequent software grants. - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
