Re: [asterisk-users] Corporate Feedback to OSS (was: Re: Mushtaq Ahmed is out of the office.)

2007-07-16 Thread Paul Hales
We have found that working WITH other Asterisk vendors is much more pleasant than working against them - especially when you all run into each other at a trade show.smile PaulH On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 11:04 -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote: On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 08:39 -0500, [EMAIL

Re: [asterisk-users] Corporate Feedback to OSS (was: Re: Mushtaq Ahmed is out of the office.)

2007-07-16 Thread Matthew Rubenstein
Until they rip off your IP, or just use all the public contributions in combination with their better funded proprietary operation, without contributing anything themselves, or even admitting they're using the tech that could use the corporate boost. FWIW, 3Com is not an Asterisk

[asterisk-users] Corporate Feedback to OSS (was: Re: Mushtaq Ahmed is out of the office.)

2007-07-07 Thread Matthew Rubenstein
On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 08:39 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 12:02:53 -0600 From: Stephen Bosch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Mushtaq Ahmed is out of the office. To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion

Re: [asterisk-users] Corporate Feedback to OSS (was: Re: Mushtaq Ahmed is out of the office.)

2007-07-07 Thread Tom Lynn
On the other hand, the guy could just be using his work e-mail for personal interests. On 7/7/07, Matthew Rubenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 08:39 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 12:02:53 -0600 From: Stephen Bosch [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re:

Re: [asterisk-users] Corporate Feedback to OSS (was: Re: Mushtaq Ahmed is out of the office.)

2007-07-07 Thread Matthew Rubenstein
True. But I think that fuzzy distinction is also relevant to the fuzzy process. I'm not talking about suing or fighting anyone, with actual evidence suitable to that kind of action. I'm just talking about clues for looking for actual evidence of actual actions. Besides, Mushtaq