On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 02:47:24PM -0700, Thomas Lord wrote: > 3. An understanding that our intent is to make a "friendly fork" - a fork > characterized by bi-directional patch sharing and the goal of maintaining > compatibility. At the same time, our fork becomes a "second supplier" of > Wave technology, viable on its own, and with an independent design effort.
Why would we do this? Answering "because we can" doesn't seem like a very good answer. Google have made it pretty clear that most of this technology is going to be open and free. I think that's probably enough. Yahoo are about to donate a proxy server to the ASF. Should we fork it, because we can? Should we fork Laconica? What logic is there behind forking an existing free software project? I know that heterogeneous environments are generally good, but forking some software just because we can fork some software seems rather bonkers. Best, -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.autonomo.us http://lists.autonomo.us/mailman/listinfo/discuss
