-andy
Sam Ruby wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:55 AM, David Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Myself, I would ask Sam to informally discuss these requests as "issues" and see what their counsel suggestsMy plans would be to discuss it with our counsel resources first. And just as a fore-warning, such discussions would likely initially occur on a non-public list. But first, I would like to eliminate all "but I want a pony" types of requests. I don't mean that in any way to be disrespectful to anybody on this mailing list, but we need to respectful of everybody's time and not request anything more than we absolutely need. For example, much of this discussion has centered around Microsoft's unsolicited OSP. To what extent does POI rely on that promise? We have not required that of others. For example, if it turns out that the OSP is at best helpful and at worst harmless, and it turns out that POI doesn't require an OSP anyway, then is there really a need to pursue clarifications? On the other hand, if it turns out that the consensus is that the licenses that are made available for OOXML are not sufficient for POI's needs and that the OSP, as currently written, does not cover the gap, then I would be glad to help broker an agreement, and failing that, help with and co-sign a letter such as this one: http://www.apache.org/foundation/docs/sender-id-position.html - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Buni Meldware Communication Suite http://buni.org Multi-platform and extensible Email, Calendaring (including freebusy), Rich Webmail, Web-calendaring, ease of installation/administration.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
