You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@poi.apache.org by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@buni.org> on 2008/04/16 15:12:58 UTC
Re: List of Patents required to implement OOXML (was: Rejection of
So That is awesome! We won't accept your evidence until AFTER the ill
motivation is demonstrated in like court, but we simultaneously won't
let you revert it. So I'm going to anyhow. The only way you can stop
me is to revoke my commit privileges. The discussion has been framed in
such a way that it is not winnable no matter what evidence is offered.
So let's start driving it to its natural conclusion. Really you had a
chat about me vetoing things before I even threatened to? Awesome!
At the end of the week I start reverting things, you will HAVE to revoke
my access to prevent that.
Nick Burch wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Apr 2008, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> Okay my -1 stands, I will revert the commits at the end of the week.
>
> Alas I'm pretty sure that's not how code vetos work. If you object to
> some code, you need to do so shortly after it is committed. Several
> months later is unfortunately too late.
>
> A few of us had a chat with several board members at apachecon (alas I
> forget exactly who), about this very thing. They basically said that
> vetos need to be soon after the commit, otherwise someone could turn
> around today and declare they don't like tomcat 4, and want to revert
> it, which clearly isn't sensible or sustainable.
>
> Full details on what is and isn't allowed with a -1 veto is on:
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> Nick
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org
--
Buni Meldware Communication Suite
http://buni.org
Multi-platform and extensible Email,
Calendaring (including freebusy),
Rich Webmail, Web-calendaring, ease
of installation/administration.
Re: List of Patents required to implement OOXML (was: Rejection of
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Andrew C. Oliver <ac...@buni.org> wrote:
>
> "screw you we're not getting the proper patent grants and we're going to do
> what we want without listening to you" so I want to get the inevitable over
> with. If it was "okay we disagree but will do our best and get the patent
> grants even though we think you're paranoid, when has Microsoft ever
> threatened this project or participated in patent trolling, attacked open
> source or attempted to redefine open source? The risk is minimal! Why are
> you so distrustful? -- But we'll work with you" then I'd have a far
> different attitude.
I don't think either of those portrayals are ones that I would
identify with or support.
> BTW, I'll be voting -1 on any releases that
> include the OOXML work even in scratchpad on the grounds that there isn't
> sufficient reason to believe that it is legally safe to run without an
> OSD-violating EULA :-)
You are welcome to do so. Just be aware of what the process is for
release votes:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org
Re: List of Patents required to implement OOXML (was: Rejection of
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@buni.org>.
Nick Burch wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Apr 2008, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> All I can say is that I didn't write the policy...
>
> You're an ASF member, aren't you? That means you're in a position to get
> involved in changing the policy, if you feel there's a flaw in it (as I
> guess you do). dev@poi probably isn't the place to do so though
>
I gave up on that a long time ago as others have before me. You will
too one day as others have before you.
>> Really you had a chat about me vetoing things before I even threatened
>> to? Awesome!
>
> I spent a very large amount of time at ApacheCon talking to people about
> poi, ooxml and microsoft. Several board members are aware of your
> position, and some people were kind enough to clarify what is and isn't
> allowed with a veto in the ASF.
>
Sigh. Right. This is Apache. Everything is always structured in a way
that stop energy can only be applied where it makes no sense (like using
LGPL libraries through reflection with no technically valid reason why
they have to be stored off server) and never where it makes sense (like
making sure patent holders don't poison the well). That is the ASF or
what it has become. Meanwhile the users see only 1/20th of what goes on
because its all on private lists. This is why I withdrew. I saw the
way the PMC/Incubator/etc crap was going, the way the board began to
make more and more decisions from the top, etc and decided that I only
cared about keeping POI safe and the rest can fall into the ocean for
all I care.
My loyalty is a bit stronger that it might be because without the users
and some of the people that supported this project early on when I was a
struggling young developer trying to make ends meet...I don't know what
I'd have done during the last recession.
>> At the end of the week I start reverting things, you will HAVE to
>> revoke my access to prevent that.
>
> May I ask why a deadline that's so soon? I started work on the ooxml
> support back in December. SourceSense joined the effort in January. It's
> now April. Do we really need to act by the end of the week?
>
Because only you are attempting to work with me. The others all stated
things that can be paraphrased:
"screw you we're not getting the proper patent grants and we're going to
do what we want without listening to you" so I want to get the
inevitable over with. If it was "okay we disagree but will do our best
and get the patent grants even though we think you're paranoid, when has
Microsoft ever threatened this project or participated in patent
trolling, attacked open source or attempted to redefine open source?
The risk is minimal! Why are you so distrustful? -- But we'll work with
you" then I'd have a far different attitude. Right now I just want to
get it over with. Also note that you told me that I can't veto what I
don't veto early so good thing I'm pressing the button now :-). BTW,
I'll be voting -1 on any releases that include the OOXML work even in
scratchpad on the grounds that there isn't sufficient reason to believe
that it is legally safe to run without an OSD-violating EULA :-) ( I
actually question if it is safe to put it in the repository without
warning users ). And as always I'll vote -1 on anything moving out
scratchpad that can't round-trip files and have them still readable
(minus the occasional bug).
I don't hate Microsoft (pre-defending against the next silly "intent"
argument). I buy some of their products even (XBox 360). I love .NET
and think it is superior to Java in all aspects but two. I merely
expect them to protect their interests (like any large group of people:
sometimes rationally, sometimes in ways that are not apparently
rational) and am asking you guys to protect ours.
-Andy
> Nick
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org
--
Buni Meldware Communication Suite
http://buni.org
Multi-platform and extensible Email,
Calendaring (including freebusy),
Rich Webmail, Web-calendaring, ease
of installation/administration.
Re: List of Patents required to implement OOXML (was: Rejection of
Posted by Nick Burch <ni...@torchbox.com>.
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> So That is awesome! We won't accept your evidence until AFTER the ill
> motivation is demonstrated in like court, but we simultaneously won't
> let you revert it.
All I can say is that I didn't write the policy...
You're an ASF member, aren't you? That means you're in a position to get
involved in changing the policy, if you feel there's a flaw in it (as I
guess you do). dev@poi probably isn't the place to do so though
> Really you had a chat about me vetoing things before I even threatened
> to? Awesome!
I spent a very large amount of time at ApacheCon talking to people about
poi, ooxml and microsoft. Several board members are aware of your
position, and some people were kind enough to clarify what is and isn't
allowed with a veto in the ASF.
> At the end of the week I start reverting things, you will HAVE to revoke
> my access to prevent that.
May I ask why a deadline that's so soon? I started work on the ooxml
support back in December. SourceSense joined the effort in January. It's
now April. Do we really need to act by the end of the week?
Nick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@poi.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@poi.apache.org