Hi Jim,
Jim Jagielski wrote on 2011-06-06 22.20:
I replied on the TDF ML about #3 which, from my reading (and
from what I have been told by entities both within and outside
of Oracle) requested the "infrastructure" which was later
clarified to mean servers, various hardware, access to
private Oracle infrastructure, etc... Which I also think
Oracle would have balked at as well...
Had TDF requested just #1 and #2, as well as a more liberal
license,*maybe* things would have been different... but
who knows. Those sorts of questions do more to retard progress
than advance it...
We are here... let's continue moving forward!
your interpretation of #3 is wrong. It reads "available for transfer",
and emphasizes that by "into The Document Foundation's infrastructure".
There is not a single word about hardware wanted.
Being the person in charge of our infrastructure, together with our
team, I confirm we would not have needed any additional hardware. We
have all we need, everything works like a charm and we still have lots
of space and resources free.
Florian
--
Florian Effenberger <flo...@documentfoundation.org>
Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation
Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108
Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
