RE: license discussions

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Gettys
> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 3:04 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [forum] license discussions
> 
> On Sun, 2004-04-04 at 15:26, Dr. Rich Murphey wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Any impression that a vendor consortium will be a public 
> servant will 
> > almost certainly change with time.  We've been there 
> before.  He who 
> > does not learn from history is doomed to repeat it.
> 
> Exactly.  Some people learn from history, and some do not.
> 
> This is why the X.org Foundation is *not* a vendor 
> consortium, (despite the similarity of name to the 
> predecessor organization, which was an industry consortium), 
> and is an open membership organization, where anyone who 
> contributes has say in its governance.

It's chaired by Sun Microsystems and governed primarily by full time staff
of vendors.


> In contrast, XFree86 has governance with no say from anyone 
> whatsoever except its board, which is self perpetuating, and 
> composed mostly of people who are no longer active 
> contributors to the X Window System.
> 
> So at this point, XFree86 has managed to become exactly what 
> it was founded to avoid, while what it avoided is becoming what
> XFree86 should have been. XFree86 is repeating previous history.
> 
> Ironic, isn't it?  Sigh.  So sad.  The wasted time and anguish.
> 
>                            - Jim