On 6 June 2011 16:39, Richard S. Hall <he...@ungoverned.org> wrote: > On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hall<he...@ungoverned.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Richard, * >>>> >>>> 2011/6/6 Richard S. Hall<he...@ungoverned.org> >>>> >>>>> On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitz<phil.ste...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [...] >>>> >>>> Disclaimer: I work for Oracle, but certainly don't speak for them and I >>>>> knew nothing about this other than what i've read on these mailing >>>>> lists... >>>>> >>>>> However, it seems like we have lost sight of the fact that TDF split >>>>> the >>>>> community from OOo. Sure, Oracle is the perceived villain and TDF the >>>>> perceived good guy, but it doesn't change the fact that OOo created the >>>>> community in the first place. >>>>> >>>>> Fact: Your employer provoked the split, by a absolute >>>> "non-communication" on the existing mailinglist. >>>> Now, to say that TDF has split the Communtiy is dishonest! >>>> >>> Forking splits communities. Whether you feel you had a justified reason >>> for >>> doing so does not change this fact. I am not weighing in on whether it is >>> right or wrong in this case, since I think that is immaterial to where we >>> are now. >>> >>> That's an example of denial. I do not see a conductive environment here >> if such attitudes are tolerated. >> >> I am only going by the "facts" as presented on the various Apache mailing >>> lists. If it is true that TDF was engaged by Oracle/IBM before the Apache >>> proposal, but failed to come to terms, then I cannot see how one can >>> claim >>> that the Apache proposal was merely an attempt to split the community. >>> >>> You should read more about free and open-source software, from diverse >> sources. >> Get a lwn.net subscription. >> >> Similar example, there was XFree86 long time ago that behaved just >> like the Oracle developers. >> Then, it was forked into X.Org and everyone moved to X.Org. >> XFree86 is a distant memory. >> >> > Ok, forget the first part of what I originally said, since it doesn't > really matter and apparently it prevents any discussion of the second > part... > > The second part was, was TDF actually engaged and failed to come to terms > or not? That is what I've read, so I accepted this as true. > > If so, do you actually believe the Apache proposal is just a stick in the > eye of the TDF by Oracle/IBM because they were angry they couldn't come to > terms? Or do you believe that because they couldn't come to terms they > created this proposal to form their own community of like-minded people? > > I would have to assume the latter, not the former. >
And the natural extension is that if there is no home for the OOo code with Apache where will it end up? That scenario is not without risk either.
