On 7/3/03 2:22 PM, "Cliff Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As Santiago points out, the veto rule provides some protection over > pure majority, but I don't think anyone here wants to rely on that. > All I can tell you is that BEA is more concerned about establishing a > long term relationship with Apache and other open source communities > than controlling the future development of XMLBeans. From our > perspective, we have much more to gain by proving ourselves as credible > and positive contributors to open source, especially since we would > like XMLBeans to be the first in a series of open source contributions. > If the BEA committers attempt to make decisions against the wishes of > the rest of the community and are viewed negatively for doing so, we > have absolutely failed in what we set out to do. > That is encouraging. That would be a nice development. Of course you understand that I don't want us to totally make an exception just because of this. At the moment, on the merits, the project has some difficulty. However using this motivation that you're expressing, I think this is a bridge that can be crossed. -andy > See my response to Howard's questions for more on how the project > differs technically from other open source projects. > > Cliff > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Andrew C. Oliver http://www.superlinksoftware.com/poi.jsp Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI http://jakarta.apache.org/poi For Java and Excel, Got POI? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
