Oh my, it is difficult to judge with only "second hand" information,
but I feel very annoyed about the (possible) mix of commercial
aspects (between JBG and Andy as a consultant) with developement
aspects.
But should cvs write access be the battlefield for this?
The jsr-77 issue is a separate question; there should be an
authority which decides about directions.
Maybe my understanding of all this is too naive: I thought there
was the
-1- the public (?) JBoss project (hosted by sf.net) and
-2- the JBG owning the JBoss trademark and interested mostly
in consulting
Ok, these two domains mix up and I never had a problem with
this, somebody has to lead the effort and the copyright of
the original sources are held by Marc anyway, even if the
LGPL license gives everybody the possibility to use and
modify it.
So this whole controversy seems sadly overloaded. I sincerly
hope that you can solve this in a way which is the best
technology wise.
- Andy: please keep cool and stay online (I like EJB timers :-)
- Marc: consider developing and consulting as two different jboss ASPECTS.
Again, I fear I misjudge because of lacking knowledge, but I couldn't
resist to comment on this. I really don't like the idea of
non-technical clash on jboss-developement.
Regards,
Michael Bartmann
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
