httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Jones" <b...@fccj.org>
Subject Re: incorporating? (was: Copyright & donating code)
Date Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:18:25 GMT
>From: Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com>
>To: new-httpd@apache.org
>Subject: Re: incorporating? (was: Copyright & donating code)
>Date: Tue, Jan 26, 1999, 7:58 AM
>

> Apaci1@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> It was NEWS to me that Apache was about go 'corporate'. Even if it's
>> 'not for profit' it doesn't take a rocket scentist to realize that
>> it's bound to change SOMETHING about the way Apache works...
>> and that's NEWS for those of us who make plans about whether
>> or not we want to use your product.
>
> "Going corporate" and "setting up a corporation to protect and foster
> what we are doing" are 2 totally different things. It's a matter of
> mindset.
>
>>
>> I have a news flash for you all. Most people don't use Apache because
>> it's 'kick-ass' software. Usually the only ass it kicks is your own when
>> you weed through the piss-poor documentation and then get beat
>> up on user-groups and you still aren't sure how it works.
>>
>> No... people use it because it's FREE and ( for a long time ) it was
>> the ONLY thing that even worked. You can get used to Malaria.
>
> I would think that, yes, there are a number who use it because it's
> free. I would further suggest that that number is very, very small
> compared to those who use it because it's better than anything else.
>
>> Now all of a sudden we are told that 'Apache is changing'.
>> Some of the thread says 'it's changing but it won't change'.
>
> All the people who are in AG are saying it won't change. It's only
> one or two people, not associated with Apache (and seemingly very
> ignorant of how AG works) who says "It's changing! The sky is falling."
>
>>
>> What does that mean?
>
> I'm sure there's some real concern about Apache. I think that, when you
> get down to it, _everything_ that's been posted by members of AG have
> been to ASSURE people that things will stay the same. It certainly
> appeared that Mr. Cranston's point of view had an ulterior motive...
>
> I guess it boils down to this. When we explicitely state exactly WHY
> Apache needs a NPO in order to allow the project to continue as is,
> and we state that nothing will change, _do you trust us_? Are people
> so cynical that they simply can't believe what we are saying? If so,
> then it's a sad time...

Since I believe I started this 'sky is falling thread', I
want to be the first to say -

The Apache Group - as a whole - has performed better
that any other group in the time I've been around, anyways.

I, personally, will trust that the Apache group will do what is
in the best interest of the product - even if that means
eventually selling it for profit.

The Apache server as a product line has matured and is ready
for such a move.  I apologize for starting this thread.
After much thought, I realize that it doesn't matter to
me one way or the other - as I will always do what I need to
do to survive - both personally and professionally.

Please accept my apologies,
-Sneex-  :]
______________________________________________________________________
Bill Jones  | FCCJ Webmaster |  http://www.fccj.org/cgi/mail?webmaster
 http://certserver.pgp.com:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x37EFC00F

Mime
View raw message