Patrick Dean Rusk wrote at 17 Dec 2002 17:40:11 -0500:
Perhaps Tony knows better, but I have a potentially plausible explanation
for Sun being secretive about their project: it may not initially have
been intended for eventual open source development. In other words, it
could be a
Then I retract the suggestion.
Pat
-Original Message-
From: Tony Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 8:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Patrick Dean Rusk wrote at 17 Dec 2002 17:40:11 -0500:
Perhaps Tony knows better
But it was plausible. :-)
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Dean Rusk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 18, 2002 12:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Then I retract the suggestion.
Pat
-Original Message-
From: Tony Graham [mailto
-Original Message-
From: Tony Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 16, 2002 12:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Arved Sandstrom wrote at 14 Dec 2002 15:05:05 -0400:
No bitterness at all, actually, Peter. It takes a bit of wind out of my
Perhaps Tony knows better, but I have a potentially plausible explanation
for Sun being secretive about their project: it may not initially have
been intended for eventual open source development. In other words, it
could be a failed internal project to create a commercial product.
On Sat, 2002-12-14 at 20:01, Victor Mote wrote:
Peter S. Housel wrote:
Looks like they want to donate it to Gnome, not Apache.
AFAIR, the BSD license is pretty incompatible with the Apache license. One
of the reasons that the xmlroff announcement doesn't change my commitment to
FOP is
Arved Sandstrom wrote at 14 Dec 2002 15:05:05 -0400:
No bitterness at all, actually, Peter. It takes a bit of wind out of my
sails, sure, since xmlroff is so similar to the project that Eric Bischoff
and myself were working on. Tony has certainly been aware of that for quite
a long time -
Arved Sandstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, Java or C or C++ or Haskell, it would have been nice to have a clue.
We have an ASF tradition of developing communities...this kind of stuff
that
Sun and IBM does is getting old. Don't open-source it; sell it. I will
argue
against its adoption
Peter S. Housel wrote:
Looks like they want to donate it to Gnome, not Apache.
AFAIR, the BSD license is pretty incompatible with the Apache license. One
of the reasons that the xmlroff announcement doesn't change my commitment to
FOP is that, for my interests anyway, the Apache license is
-Original Message-
From: Peter S. Housel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 14, 2002 2:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sun XSL Formatter
Arved Sandstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, Java or C or C++ or Haskell, it would have been nice to
have a clue.
We
-Original Message-
From: Victor Mote [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 14, 2002 3:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Peter S. Housel wrote:
Looks like they want to donate it to Gnome, not Apache.
AFAIR, the BSD license is pretty incompatible
Response Below:
-Original Message-
From: Arved Sandstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sat 12/14/2002 2:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Victor, I
-Original Message-
From: Victor Mote [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 14, 2002 3:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
But can I point out that C is about as portable as it gets?
Maybe someone on this list has time to throw
Peter S. Housel wrote:
Arved Sandstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, Java or C or C++ or Haskell, it would have been nice to have a clue.
We have an ASF tradition of developing communities...this kind of stuff
that
Sun and IBM does is getting old. Don't open-source it; sell it. I will
Response below.
-Original Message-
From: Arved Sandstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sat 12/14/2002 3:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Sure, in a narrow
Not to sound bitter, but it would have been nice to know about this sooner.
This pretty much usurps what I and Eric Bischoff have been doing (when we
can); I sort of figure it didn't get written in the last month either. Any
reason for the blasted secretiveness?
Arved
-Original Message-
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
Not to sound bitter, but it would have been nice to know about this sooner.
This pretty much usurps what I and Eric Bischoff have been doing (when we
can); I sort of figure it didn't get written in the last month either. Any
reason for the blasted secretiveness?
From:
-
From: Peter B. West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 13, 2002 8:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sun XSL Formatter
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
Not to sound bitter, but it would have been nice to know about
this sooner.
This pretty much usurps what I and Eric Bischoff have
On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 09:18, Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
Hello there!
Nikolai Grigoriev discovered new xsl formatter becoming open source ;)
http://www.xmlconference.org/xmlusa/2002/thursday.asp#vp5
Comments? Does anybody plan to participate xml 2002? Some people even
suggest it's Apache where
Keiron Liddle wrote:
On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 09:18, Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
Hello there!
Nikolai Grigoriev discovered new xsl formatter becoming open source ;)
http://www.xmlconference.org/xmlusa/2002/thursday.asp#vp5
Comments? Does anybody plan to participate xml 2002? Some people even
suggest
Keiron Liddle wrote:
On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 09:18, Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
Hello there!
Nikolai Grigoriev discovered new xsl formatter becoming open source ;)
http://www.xmlconference.org/xmlusa/2002/thursday.asp#vp5
Comments? Does anybody plan to participate xml 2002? Some people even
suggest
21 matches
Mail list logo
