Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <441709F1.5070306@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:22:41 -0800
From: Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano@apache.org>
Organization: Apache Software Foundation
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Macintosh/20051201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [jchevm] JCHEVM discussion]
References: <4414AEB7.30605@sablevm.org> <4414C273.4080006@pobox.com>
 <4414EAB8.3040709@sablevm.org>
 <20060313170449.GC67809@bali.sjc.webweaving.org>
 <20060313204716.GA16042@pogo.kaffe.org> <4415F76F.6030102@sablevm.org>
 <20060314101834.GB88461@bali.sjc.webweaving.org>
 <4416B4B1.3070607@sablevm.org>
In-Reply-To: <4416B4B1.3070607@sablevm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> Hi Leo,
> 
> Leo Simons wrote:
>> Thanks for your clarifications! Since Geir has informed me that some
>> of the conversation related to this issue is currently also proceeding
>> outside of the public forum (I must say I personally find that a shame
>> -- all of the open source community can learn from things like this if
>> the discussion happens in public), I'll respect the desire for a little
>> privacy and refrain from commenting further here, below, except to note
>> that,
> 
> While it is not my objective to eliminate transparency from the
> discussion, I really felt that it would be much easier to work out a
> solution in private, where I don't feel the pressure of hundreds of eyes
> reading each of my words, specially that the heat is on me, as the SVN
> access to JCHEVM has been blocked.
> 
> It is much easier to discuss calmly with somebody that won't jump at
> every sentence I miswrote, and that will try to figure out why I am
> making a claim, what my claim is, and how it can all be resolved
> peacefully.  Even though most people on this list are trying to do the
> same, it can only feel different, as it is intimidating to be "one" to
> answer to "many" people's questions.

Etienne,

that is understandable and I respect your feelings in this regard.

Please understand that we are not trying to do things in public to apply 
peer pressure on you to solve the issue faster or to bend your opinion, 
but simply and only to have public and world-wide-replicated (therefore 
unforgeable and legally valuable) record that we do care and we do 
respect intellectual property, copyright and, most important, the people 
involved and their wishes, in order the keep the Harmony project as free 
as we can from frustration and friction that we consider unnecessary.

We (as a community) will make mistakes, we know and expect that, it 
can't be avoided. But we can only hope to correct those mistakes 
promptly and in a respectful way: we value interpersonal relationships 
and the open development ecosystem around Harmony *much* more than we 
value pieces of codes or algorithms, no matter how clever or hard to 
write they are.

> I am sure that Geir will explain on this list, transparently, the
> outcome of our amicable discussions, when we get there (very soon, I hope).
> 
> Thanks for your understanding,

Thank you for your peaceful and amicable tone.

Let's all hope for a future of Harmony where all legal/IP/copyright 
disputes will work themselves thru with....ehm.. such harmony :-)

-- 
Stefano.