Just as a procedural aside from copyright/license issues....
If you have very substantive changes to the document that has been through public comment already, do you realize another 60 day comment period might be necessary (i.e. if the changes aren’t just for addressing the current set of public comments)?
-- Chris
On 29/3/10 10:58 , "Sam Johnston" <samj@samj.net> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Christopher Smith <csmith@platform.com> wrote:
I would imagine that achieving consensus on various issues related to the OCCI spec should be one of the important things for the OCCI-WG to be doing right now, as the version 1.0 specification is now out of public comment and is in the final stages before becoming a GFD. This most definitely includes the issue of copyright/license of the final GFD, and just because Sam Johnston decides he’s done with the conversation does not indicate consensus in the group and/or the organization.
The spec out for public comment is far from complete so before we do anything else it needs to be finished - at least we'll then have something (long overdue) to talk about and market. My time is extremely and increasingly limited and I don't plan to waste any more of it discussing something that I was quite clear about from the outset - unjustifiably restrictive licensing will unnecessarily stifle adoption. Ironically trying to avoid forking by seeking consensus where there is apparently none to be had virtually guarantees a fork from the outset.
Sam