Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 64954 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2010 19:59:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 20 Jan 2010 19:59:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 48043 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jan 2010 19:59:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 47988 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jan 2010 19:59:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact esme-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 47978 invoked by uid 99); 20 Jan 2010 19:59:54 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:59:54 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.217 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.218.217] (HELO mail-bw0-f217.google.com) (209.85.218.217) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:59:46 +0000 Received: by bwz9 with SMTP id 9so4359131bwz.12 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:59:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=SwZIX/fHK8RH4Fnesdt6u/46VF/jeZup7myRum0HqrE=; b=csGlYO9jLfhLY77aKoz76jYzQEL2RcbxDLqhsTZNBCE15kRbG5SXH0HsLov8KeUoB7 0RljaGMuXcAbOxNgEf+NEL6IgP9qGjyOW8Dujef8DMxUxiVmLQGGVMTWmKCIxznTR8Is jdUqgiXRbtzSektAM7IfBoL3vdo9cm3xwv550= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ScliPBUCUIoCQp0VM8SSth5AaHFc4dAd6jw06nzT1B+vxDNH0Bm+pI/e7RDdWGP6TO ulkCwhcZ6ohSoGMk48SP699/b6zNEENlcFduHttQEUfyDwIXnrkRu+ZrDInJmyB+O1Wb CSmOrvg1WtAtxwRNrhdDXpROB3pFZvzcMr2Bk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.14.84 with SMTP id f20mr204242bka.209.1264017566372; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:59:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4464798E-839C-40B3-8267-0A63732A0592@gmail.com> <11537819-3D20-4187-8BF8-436A28558903@dslextreme.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:59:26 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [VOTE] Copyright issue (ESME-47) From: Robert Burrell Donkin To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 7:11 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:59 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: >> ...I suggest you review the thread that was provided and then see if you want to reconsider your veto.... > > As this vote is not about a technical issue, I don't think there are > vetos - we should have explicitely specified that this is a majority > vote. > > Robert and Gianugo, did you mean to veto this with your -1s, or just > express your disagreement with the majority? i consider making claims about third party copyright ownership rather than a statement of fact is positively dangerous from a legal perspective so, it's a legal team veto until i have chance to review (my exam is tomorrow morning so i should be able to find some time in the afternoon) if anyone objects or feels that i am wrong then please raise on the legal lists. if sam ruby or a majority of the legal team folks feel that i'm wrong then i'm happy to be outvoted. - robert