On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 07:58:38AM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> The ASF does not muddy the waters of open source development with cash. Our
> sponsors do not sponsor specific projects or activities. For this reason we
> cannot ask IBM or anyone else to pay for this podling.
>
> I do agree that th
Hello, Niall,
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 10:11:02AM +0100, Niall Pemberton wrote:
> If you're right about the costs, they not going to hit from day one -
> as the initial effort will be in building the community and building
> something that can be released and very little needed in terms of end
> us
I have concerns about the proposal, but not with the ones you raise.
If you're right about the costs, they not going to hit from day one -
as the initial effort will be in building the community and building
something that can be released and very little needed in terms of end
users - and the ASF
>> would then like
>> to see a binding committment from IBM to fund this budget -- with cash,
>
> The ASF does not muddy the waters of open source development with cash. Our
> sponsors do not sponsor specific projects or activities. For this reason we
> cannot ask IBM or anyone else to pay for t
Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos)
On 7 Jun 2011, at 02:40, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> would then like
> to see a binding committment from IBM to fund this budget -- with cash,
The ASF does not muddy the waters of open source development with cash. Our
sponsors do not sponsor s
Greetings,
After a long period of reflection, I have accumulated many serious concerns
about the viability of the proposed OOo podling. There are a lot of unknowns
which make it hard to predict whether the project will become self-sustaining
-- but while the grand experiment plays out, it is goin
