on 2/11/01 2:47 AM, "Jim Driscoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And contribs didn't fall into a black hole, which is way more important
> than the license.
Yup.
> That probably had way more to do with tying to the Apache brand than the
> OS nature of the licensing terms. If Sun'd released Tomcat under some
> open source license without tying to Apache, things might have turned
> out quite different.
Hmmm...I don't know about that. Personally speaking, I would have
contributed to Tomcat if it had been held under a BSD'ish license no matter
where it lived...
My criteria are:
#1. Easy access to CVS.
#2. Good mailing lists.
#3. Ability to contribute easily.
Back in Sept 1997, I originally forked JServ over to working-dogs.com
because none of the above was true.
> License != community. As I'm sure you're in a good position to know :-)
Actually, I disagree. I don't care about how good the GNU community is. I
don't like the license and I don't want to contribute to software under it.
> Fixing the license part is hard. Fixing the community part is now
> Duncan's job. Go, Duncan!
Yup.
> Err, select()? The point of the post was that it was claimed that
> select() should be easy to do - so I asked him to prove it.
Why should he write software for Sun for free? If it is so easy to
implement, then Sun should have the people they pay do it.
Otherwise, release the code under a license and community that is open so
that people who contribute don't feel like they are working for Sun for
free.
:-)
-jon
--
If you come from a Perl or PHP background, JSP is a way to take
your pain to new levels. --Anonymous
<http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/> && <http://java.apache.org/turbine/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
