On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Christopher Smith <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:csmith@platform.com" target="_blank">csmith@platform.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">





<div>
<font face="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span style="font-size:9pt">I would imagine that achieving consensus on various issues related to the OCCI spec <i>should</i> 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. <br>


<div><div></div></div></span></font></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The spec out for public comment is <b>far from complete</b> so before we do <b>anything</b> else it needs to be finished - at least we&#39;ll then have something (long overdue) to talk about and market. My time is extremely and increasingly limited and I don&#39;t plan to waste any more of it discussing something that I was quite clear about from the outset - unjustifiably restrictive licensing <b>will</b> 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.</div>

<div><br></div><div>Sam</div><div><br></div></div>