I just updated the report - please lemme know if that is OK. Thanks again,
Les On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Emmanuel, > > Thanks very much for the feedback - I appreciate it a lot. I'll > adjust accordingly and re-notify so we can review again. > >> 1) About the name, I would suggest we just keep the matter open, as more >> IPMC members are stepping in. Right now, the vote is closed and the result >> is not positive, but (1) I don't think it was a good idea to vote such an >> item [1] and (2) I'm not sure I won't cast my vote in another direction if >> Juniper is not considered as a risk or if Juniper legals just let us using >> JSecurity. > > Gotcha. I'll revise that section to say it is still open at the moment. > >> 2) You have to mention that Alex Karasulu has stepped down as a mentor. > > Ah yes, thanks. I'll add that as well. > >> Otherwise, it's a pretty good report. We have one more day for other >> comments. >> >> [1] The reason I think it was not a good idea to vote is that if we are not >> trying to solve an issue, but to determinate if there is an IP issue. No >> matter if you get all the -1 needed to keep JSecurity name, you may still be >> forced to change the name if The ASF get sued and lose. > > Sounds good. It is very helpful to learn when would be a good time to > vote vs when to let discussion continue. This was a great learning > experience for me, and is one of the great things the Incubator > affords us. Thanks :) > > Best, > > Les >
