Darren J Moffat wrote: > Darren Reed wrote: > ... >> I think that derailing this case is an over-reaction primarily >> because it has been seen as an "attack" tool without properly >> considering what the scope of its potential targets is. > > Derail just means "lets have a full case discussion" it does not now > and never has mean't "no you can't do that" or "deny".
Part of me was thinking that it's been a while since a case got derailed so... ;) > All it means is that the case needs some discusion, usually because > there is something controversial - which in this case there is. The > project team has also been asked (since they are Sun engineers) to > check with Sun legal (this isn't really an ARC requirement more a > C-Team/P-Team one but the ARC is asking the question now since they > are first to review). I agree, the project team should consult with Sun legal before making any further move to have this provided publicly by Sun - regardless of how it is bundled up. Darren
