Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 23:46:03 -0500 (EST)
From: Aaron Mulder <ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu>
To: jBoss Developer <jboss-dev@list.working-dogs.com>
cc: Tomcat Dev List <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>,
   Java Apache Framework <java-apache-framework@list.working-dogs.com>
Subject: Re: [jBoss-Dev] Re: jboss on tomcat update
In-Reply-To: <20001030032831.AAA8098@mail4.nycap.rr.com@dano>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010292338390.20042-100000@gentoo.CS.Princeton.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Dan OConnor wrote:
> In no way is the choice of license intended to prevent aggregation 
> with Tomcat, nor to the best of my knowledge does the board--or 
> the jBoss community in general--currently believe that this is the 
> result. This sort of opinion is not like source code; we can't compile 
> it and see it run (or not). I'm sorry about that. But there it is.

	Do you acknowledge that a number of people have a different
opinion?  If so, do you think their opinions count?  That is, will you be
happy if everyone on the jBoss board believes that jBoss can be legally
integrated with Tomcat, or will you be happy if everyone in the world
believes that jBoss can be legally integrated with Tomcat?
	In my case, it is not a case of what I believe, but what my
company's clients believe, and unfortunately they do not see eye to eye
with the jBoss board.  Does that matter to you?  It matters to me, because
it matters to the people who decide what I will be paid to work on.  :)
	I think we should do whatever we can to make jBoss universally
acceptable.  Because I want everyone in the universe to be able to choose
to use it, on the basis of its features not on the basis of its license.

Aaron