-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jon Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<snip>
> > Don't you think this is illogical? It doesn't matter where you innovate just
> > that it is done in an open manner.
>
> An open manner would have been joining this group (not that I'm sure they
> would even want you back) and participating in a group development.
> Especially since this group is already covering what you intend to cover.
Again... back to my revolutionary idea set. We are introducing too many ideas
and these would never make it though in a committee.
<snip>
> > Again... Doesn't matter what the ASF thinks. It matters what the FSF (and
> > Stallman) thinks.
>
> Bullshit.
Jon... I want this to be a professional discussion. Please watch your tone.
Inviting conflict does not contribute to a productive discussion.
> The ASF is a legal foundation and can make decisions for its own
> code. If the ASF says that the licenses are compatible, then it is up to the
> FSF to sue the ASF. Do you really think that Stallman is that stupid?
This not my point. If the FSF thinks that the licenses are incompatible it will
not use our code, invent their own projects to compete with ours, etc. This is
the situation I want to avoid, not a lawsuit.
I support both the FSF *and* ASF and both of their goals.
<snip>
> If you have a single unrestrictive OPEN (not FREE)
"Live free or die"
Sorry... I value my freedom. After all, I live in America, land of the free,
home of the brave :)
> license on the software,
> then you don't need to dual license things. Period.
(again... putting on my FSF hat) The problem with the BSD is that it allows
paracitism (not trying to insult anyone... this is from game theory). The GPL
protect the original authors freedom.
(putting on the ASF hat) The only problem with the GPL is that it does limit
individuals/corporations in some circumstances when they want to bundle their
code with proprietary code. In some situations this can actually be more
productive than the copyleft policy.
> >>> 3. I have not had time to work within the ASF because I am spending all my
> >>> time
> >>> working on OpenPrivacy. Hopefully this will change soon.
> >>
> >> Lame excuse.
> >
> > yeah... right. Spending 15 hours a day working on OpenPrivacy stuff certainly
> > allows me plenty fo time to work within the ASF.
> > <snip>
>
>
> If you had used Turbine as your framework, then that would have counted as
> part of your 15 hours a day. HELLO?
As it sits today, Reptile has no need for any code within Turbine. The only
layer we will need in the future is something like Torque. At that point I have
no problem contributing fixes/patches/contributions to Turbine.
I hope this clarifies my position a little better.
> I am working on an Issue Tracking system
> in another project on another server (scarab.tigris.org) and I'm using
> Turbine as the basis for it. Somehow I have time during my 15 hours a day to
> work on ASF stuff.
Good for you.
> > Not by my definition. I don't see Ant, Velocity etc as being anything other
> > than a revolution which is 6 months out. These are also tools which impact a
> > very small percentage of the population.
>
> What the hell are you talking about?
>
> Ant is one of the most widely used Java build systems around today. Nearly
> every project (including your own) uses it.
>
> Tomcat gets 100,000k downloads a MONTH!
There are 6 billion people living on this planet? How many of them are Java
developers? 100,000k people is a small number within this population.
I didn't mean to imply that Jakarta isn't important within the Java community.
> > The work we are doing under OpenPrivacy is at least on a 10 year timespan and
> > should affect the entire population of the Internet. ... THAT is a
> > revolution.
>
> Dude, I haven't seen you even get close to finishing a single project yet. I
> haven't even seen you be stable anywhere yet.
You lack my viewpoint. All I care is getting the right feature set to the right
people. If this happens in Jetspeed, Reptile, or whatever it doesn't matter.
As long as it happens.
I believe Reptile brings me much closer to this point. It is the first
technology which we belive can act as a "Primary Agent" in the OpenPrivacy
framework.
> My confidence that you will be working on OP.org for the next 10 years is
> currently at -10000000000.
Can't wait to prove you wrong.
> > Yeah... you are right. What was I thinking. The work I did on Jetspeed was
> > terrible and everyone should stop using/working on it.
>
> Yup.
OK everyone... Jon thinks that the Jetspeed project is terrible and everyone
should stop working on it.
> > Oh wait... don't think that will happen because a lot of people like Jetspeed
> > and want to see it move forward.
>
> A large portion of the code that you did on Jetspeed has long since been
> replaced.
It has been one year! I would expect no less!
> > I hope the Jetspeed team continues and succeeds with all their goals. The
> > only differences WRT Reptile/Jetspeed are that Reptile has a broader set of
> > goals (IMO) and we just have an architecture philosophy difference.
>
> Good luck yourself. Maybe this time you will actually finish something within
> the next 10 years...
I am not going to dignify this statement with a reply.
... and if you choose to reply to this email, please do so in a professional
manner... or don't do so at all.
Kevin
- --
Kevin A. Burton ( [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
Cell: 408-910-6145 URL: http://relativity.yi.org ICQ: 73488596
The worse thing in life is to fall short!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt
iD8DBQE7UKMGAwM6xb2dfE0RAn6dAKCaGmVNMO2TsncetVJ3b9NEqSfsgACgrVcy
ClMDFafT/0gshAfg4x/C6xY=
=y/t5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
