Michael Meeks wrote:
> It still leaves something you can't answer though: whether it is Rob's
> understanding of IBM's intention to camouflage such changes or to flag
> them all openly and clearly.
Separating the above from what seems to be the underlying concern.
> Ultimately with a suite of 8+ million lines, packed with obscure features,
> and thousands of lines of change a day it is fairly easy to slip things in,
> to the potential detriment of other users of the code.
Wait. How is an IP remediation of "potential detriment of other users of the
code"? I can appreciate your concern over potential submarine patents -- we do
have a clause to address that -- but how is REMOVAL of a problem a potential
detriment?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
