On 12-Sep-00 at 05:10, Alexander Mai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 07:35:10AM +0200, Danny Backx wrote:
> > Rick wrote :
> > > Danny, have you ever heard anything back from the openMotif dudes with
> > > respect to some of the issues that we raised. They seem to have all
> > > retreated back into obscurity. There was a lot of hype, they got a CVS
> > > up, issued some patches, which didn't seem to make it into CVS, promised
> > > some answers, or at least some discussion, then silence.... Are we the
> > > only game in town again???
> >
> > I've had a reply from someone in TOG that they were going to pick up the
> > issues we raised, and they would try to address them.
> >
> > To be honest, a round of negociations amongst companies that are
> > profit-driven, for a topic such as this, is bound to take some time. So
> > I am not surprised about the silence.
> >
> > Now may be a good time to ask them again. As I recall there were three
> > basic critics of the license : you, RMS, and I :-)
> >
> > Danny
>
> Did I miss something special?
> What exactly are the issues you're talking about?
>
> I'm only on the OM announce mailinglist IIRC and there's not much
> traffic indeed ...
I put a query up on the OM devel list yesterday, first traffic I've seen on it
in months. I got one reply back, directly to me not the list :( It seems that
the opengroup and MotifZone are working on this independantly. OG is putting
out patches that I can't even get to apply to the copy I get from CVS. It
appears as though they are working off of different copies. If they really want
this thing to fly, I think they need a lesson on open source development.
Everything still seems to be going on behind closed doors. The only difference
now is that they open the door every now and then to through something out....
>
> --
> Alexander Mai
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
