RE: license discussions

At 02:15 PM 4/4/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>On Sun, 4 Apr 2004, Jim Gettys wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
>  I believe that the X.org foundation will eventually be a vendor
>consortium.  Some of the vendors have too much at stake and
>I have seen the pressure they have put on the XFree86 project.
>The X.org foundation will either come under attack as XFree86
>has, with complaints of it not serving its constituents, or it
>will turn into a vendor driven organization.  I predict the
>later.
>
>  You can call me cynical, but I even believe that there are
>people associated with the creation of the X.org foundation
>who know this, and that this is all just a guise to come up
>with a vendor driven organization with a better public image.
>

i hear you man.

mark.