Hi all, There's been a bit of a gap since Antonio's last thread/summary.
Can we have a checkpoint now & see what's changed, if anything? I know there's been some discussion with legal@ and I'd happily volunteer to discuss the copyright issue with Newcastle Uni, if the project felt that this would help move things forwards. If not, then it seems like the following are our options - unless I've missed a thread & am out of date*: 1. We proceed with a release (Incubator permits releases even if all exit criteria are not met) 2. We tag the existing trunk & mark it DORMANT; starting a fresh API (ie abstract/interface only) for discussion - attempting a cleaner implementation thereafter 3. We send Amber to the Attic Question: Are there any other options? p * Happy to be corrected, of course! Note: IANAL but I think that #2 might be tricky legally, without finding new committers who are not tainted by having read our code; copyright in software is reasonably well established in this regard AFAIK. #2 effectively implies that our tenure of the project is a transitional one, as we'd effectively be handing it over to people who can write code for the project. -- [key:62590808]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
