> Some thoughts: > > - Zero Royalty versus (perpetual) Royalty Free ? Or a perpatual > license with Zero Royalty today.
I think a perpetual license is a big issue, because otherwise people have to assume the rug could be yanked from under them. I know that's my biggest concern, personally. Speaking just as an employee and not a developer, I know that the spectre of a change in the terms would bother my company a lot more than a token licensing fee. > - Does it affect just ASF Developers or also the End-Users or people > who download our code ? I think the fax-back requirement on end-users/developers who download the library sucks, no doubt about it. It would be nice to achieve the détente that Roy mentioned, which presumes acceptance of the terms. > - Does it affect individual developers or can the ASF act as an > effective umbrella for all its committers ? In light of the language there, and the fact that the code that those devlopers commit is donated to the ASF, I would guess that this is pretty much the spirit of what's there now. In any case, my thoughts notwithstanding, it's obviously something that the people interested in building new Apache WS projects on SAML should decide. -- Scott --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
