Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jcp-open-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 26130 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2007 10:28:28 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Jul 2007 10:28:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 95282 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jul 2007 10:28:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jcp-open-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 95166 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jul 2007 10:28:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jcp-open-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: jcp-open@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list jcp-open@apache.org Received: (qmail 95154 invoked by uid 99); 7 Jul 2007 10:28:28 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 03:28:28 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of sa3ruby@gmail.com designates 209.85.146.177 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.146.177] (HELO wa-out-1112.google.com) (209.85.146.177) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 03:28:24 -0700 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m28so598546wag for ; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 03:28:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=DgD2SWv1RNl4Mb4z0JPiJ7fcwcd05qwaf/emONP/4suxP0ioRkGhJJNPMoLZEkCszTfh/jQe98fiVNon+wOZ+nu8Tx1DDVNqmncBWMWb43AaWJw89Deuc6T8Zbm+Pokkg52Qe+MsAnFc7ycG8tpI8aMKyP3lC84gTL1G+wG327A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=kya/M09tvQfJeyi8yOH8ilj0w2sHSTvRGbpMPEKelMUeSUzH+JiWfcDDwGP1FYgN1qMDnlHKxfGEreRuA1a2DVp+q1+dGYo7sIsqI0abTw3Hzv2JAcHGOLvxq8z3Xl4R80EsI6vt+bsDFaEiLihUcAE9MyEq5Y2HRVAxsTGjlAU= Received: by 10.115.110.6 with SMTP id n6mr1434631wam.1183804083425; Sat, 07 Jul 2007 03:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.166.16 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Jul 2007 03:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3d4032300707070328p5c44a02ei9000591d6c8d66a9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 06:28:03 -0400 From: "Sam Ruby" Sender: sa3ruby@gmail.com To: jcp-open@apache.org Subject: Re: Are proprietary TCK's compatible with open standards? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <468C3166.5020903@apache.org> <878x9v7gpr.fsf@gemini.sunstarsys.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 97d5e66b43da0364 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 7/6/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > We're reacting in anger at the FOU issue by tying the NDA issue. I am frustrated. I am against the ASF participating with NDAs. I have always been against the ASF participating with NDAs. Since long before the FOU issue. And, on the off chance it ever happens, I will still be against the ASF participating in NDAs long after the FOU issue is a distant memory. Meanwhile, I see our friends at the FSF saying essentially "hey, wait a minute" and rising in chorus against the same issue. But I can't bring this up now, because we are in prolonged and (apparently interminable discussions) on an unrelated issue? I continue to want us to vote NO on any vote where the JSR in question will require NDAs for technical participation, including conformance requirements. - Sam Ruby