> -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: December 16, 2002 12:23 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter > > > Arved Sandstrom wrote at 14 Dec 2002 15:05:05 -0400: > > No bitterness at all, actually, Peter. It takes a bit of wind out of my > > sails, sure, since xmlroff is so similar to the project that > Eric Bischoff > > and myself were working on. Tony has certainly been aware of > that for quite > > a long time - I don't understand why the secrecy, myself, > seeing as how we > > are now looking at an OSS donation anyway. > > Sun policy, not personal policy. > > I assure you that there are many steps, and many signatures, required > when a large corporation makes an open source donation. Purely > because it is a large corporation making the donation and not an > individual contributor, there is a lot of "due diligence" to be done. > If a project can't pass all the criteria, it won't be made public. > > Since a project intended for open souce may not make it to open > source, it is perhaps better to say nothing until the due diligence is > completed (or, in this case, very nearly completed). The alternative > -- announcing an intention to make a public source donation -- risks > the project not passing the criteria and risks later accusations of > vapourware or accusations of lack of commitment to open source when > the project can't be made public. > > That's why I couldn't say anything about the formatter in the lead up > to XML 2002: any of a number of people -- not just engineers and > engineering managers -- could have vetoed the donation for any of a > number of reasons, and I would have just had to withdraw from the > conference without another word being said.
I actually know that. I was just blowing off steam. :-) > > I'd be bitter if I were so arrogant as to think of myself as > being upstaged. > > :-) That's not the case. I am quite familiar with the spec, > and there are > > now a number of competing efforts. None of which are quite accurate. So > > there is room for more competition. Alternatively, I may talk > to Tony and > > Eric and see if we can assist. > > Part of why it is written in C is so it doesn't compete with FOP for > developers. > > Arved took the wind out of my sails for a while when he announced his > SourceForge project, so wind taking runs both ways. I would be > pleased if Arved and/or Eric would consider assisting with the > project. Frankly, I would be pleased if *anybody* assisted with the > project, but Arved and Eric would be a bonus. Eric will have to weigh in himself. I think he is partial to C++. I am partial to C, and said that earlier this year; it was my original intention to go with C. I've been dormant on xslfoproc for a while; work has not permitted much OSS for me at all. I may have time coming up; it would be a pleasure to help out. I also concur that it would be nice to have Eric involved. I see no reason for competition. A single decent open-source C or C++ implementation would be great. Incidentally, my comments about potentially having had to consider the adoption of this project into Apache still stand. It is no reflection on the project, or on you, Tony. It is a personal philosophical stance - yes, company donations have provided the ASF with fine software, but there is a downside. Arved --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
