Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Message-ID: <55CA61A4.1030608@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 21:57:08 +0100
From: Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Subject: Re: on consensus, and serenity and Eclipse
References: <12a101d0d477$48835e30$d98a1a90$@rosenlaw.com>
In-Reply-To: <12a101d0d477$48835e30$d98a1a90$@rosenlaw.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 11/08/2015 21:49, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> Mark Thomas wrote:
> 
>> What Larry can't seem to get his head around is that the membership is
> happy with the current policy and - despite the points he raises - has
> no wish to change it.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> The only email I can find from you in my archives even remotely on this
> topic was dated 5/20/2015 and it discussed the compliance of our Tomcat
> 7 release notes with the Eclipse License.  Perhaps I misfiled your
> comments. Please forward me any other email from you "that the
> membership is happy with the current policy and - despite the points he
> raises - has no wish to change it."  I do acknowledge having received
> some such email, but not from many members. Not many at all!

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/

and others.

If you can't be bothered to search the archives, I'm not going to do it
for you.

> Speaking of the Eclipse License, do you want me to start another thread
> about our willingness to aggregate Eclipse code with ALv2 code?

No.

Mark


> I am confident that a large number of companies
> <http://www.eclipse.org/membership/showAllMembers.php> will approve
> that. I am confident that the Eclipse Foundation will not object.
> 
>  
> 
> /Larry
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Thomas [mailto:markt@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 1:12 PM
> To: legal-discuss@apache.org
> Subject: Re: on consensus, and serenity
> 
>  
> 
> On 11/08/2015 20:53, Tim Williams wrote:
> 
>> I'm curious how we can work ourselves out of this nagging cycle of
> 
>> Larry encouraging us to be more liberal in our licenses because we
> 
>> legally can and us responding with we don't want to even if we could
> 
>> legally get away with it?
> 
>>
> 
>> By my count, four out of the previous four months have seen this same
> 
>> cycle in only slightly different forms.  I'm confident a quick mail
> 
>> search would find at least as many months out of the previous four
> 
>> years.  And, these tend to be long (>50) threads.
> 
>>
> 
>> I support challenging the status quo, questioning policies, etc. In
> 
>> fact, I believe it makes us stronger and a good rigorous debate on
> 
>> core values helps newcomers to understand the Apache Way and our
> 
>> culture in a deeper way.  It's healthy community behavior and
> 
>> old-timers mostly don't mind helping folks understand the "why" behind
> 
>> a given policy.
> 
>>
> 
>> However, it's not healthy to keep asking the same question, over and
> 
>> over, even while receiving the same answer each time.  It's neither
> 
>> fun nor fruitful. Were it a technical issue, we could reason through
> 
>> it and move on much more easily.
> 
>>
> 
>> So, I wonder how we might re-assure Larry that his voice has been
> 
>> heard but also allow us not to keep reading the same argument over and
> 
>> over?
> 
>  
> 
> The lengthy replies to each of the multiple times Larry has raised this
> point should be more than enough to convince him his voice has been heard.
> 
>  
> 
> What Larry can't seem to get his head around is that the membership is
> happy with the current policy and - despite the points he raises - has
> no wish to change it.
> 
>  
> 
>> I've thought perhaps a referendum membership vote (with steve) might
> 
>> help? or maybe an explicit vote by the board [vs implicit by keeping
> 
>> Jim around:)] or, ?
> 
>  
> 
> More than enough time has been wasted repeatedly responding to Larry
> only for him to ignore responses he doesn't like. We don't need to waste
> more time trying to appease Larry. If Larry wants to try and raise this
> at the annual members meeting he is free to do so. I note he has asked
> again today for folks employed by big companies to speak up with their
> views on his proposal. Several of us already have (in favour of the
> current policy) and he continues to ignore those posts.
> 
>  
> 
> At this point Larry's behaviour is best categorised as trolling and
> should be treated as such. If the trolling behaviour continues then I'll
> treat it the same way I'd treat it on any other ASF list: by
> unsubscribing the troll.
> 
>  
> 
> Mark
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> <mailto:legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org>
> 
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> <mailto:legal-discuss-help@apache.org>
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org