Thanks for the insightful comments. Nobody addressed Joyent's new business initiative in competition with StrongLoop or how their IP claims impact that. It'll be interesting to see how that goes.
Mikeal, thanks for your work on node, too. Regarding Joyent's credibility: point taken -- it's really the whole node ecosystem that gets hurt when articles like "Slap-fight in Node Land" hit the press. As you say, creating a separate node foundation isn't realistic. The proposal was about exploring what an existing foundation like Apache (or Eclipse, or Mozilla) has to offer. Comments for/against were expected. Incidentally, submitting a project to the Apache Incubator is free. Isaac, agreed "perceived ownership" isn't the right phrase. People could be thinking of Oracle and MySQL / Hudson / Java, but I'm not sure there's a succinct word for that situation. Many good points in your reply, but it seems targeted at the early adopters. You asserted Joyent's ownership and referred to node as a "cash cow"; if I'm trying to justify the use of Node.JS to a room full of managers or a new startup, and this statement came up, it would be problematic. Matt, definitely agree with your comments about alienating Ben. Misunderstandings happen, and if they can't be resolved without immediately "firing" someone, that's bad. There has to be a better way. -- -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
