Subject: Re: OVPL / CDDL (OSCON meeting)
From: David Ryan <david@livemedia.com.au>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:57:51 +1000

It sounds like that the board were to actually meet on Wednesday at the 
European OSCON.  Was the OVPL discussed at all, and has the board made a 
decision on how to proceed with this license?  I believe the boards 
approval is the only current requirement pending for OVPL and OVLPL.

I would also be interested in other discussions the board made which can 
be safely made public.  I completely agree with the sentiment of David 
Barret's emails.  I understand that not all the boards business should 
be made available.  However, items such as licenses discussed and some 
other tid bits of information would be useful.

btw.  You can play OSI's who's who here..
http://www.flickr.com/photos/x180/sets/1145208/

David.


Alex Bligh wrote:

> I am conscious there is some sort of board meeting today and wanted to
> update the board on what has been happening with the discussions we've
> been having with Sun re incorporating the non-OVPL-specific bits back
> into the CDDL.
>
> I had hoped we'd have an agreed joint statement on this by today, but 
> being
> busy people on multiple timezones, logistics seem to have got in the way,
> and that seems to have presented that happening up till now - I hope
> it will happen in short order.
>
> Suffice to say, following my conversation with Simon Phipps from Sun, the
> following have emerged:
> 1. Sun is, as I understand, interested in improving the CDDL, especially
>   improving its performance in multiple jurisdictions. They are 
> interested
>   in our, and anyone else's input.
> 2. However, there is other work going on, and they do not envisage a new
>   version coming out for many months (at the earliest) - any revision
>   is likely to have more changes in than just the revisions we propose
>   (if they take them), and be a substantial time away.
> 3. Notwithstanding, we have agreed to continue to work together.
>
> Therefore, it looks like rolling those amendments back into the CDDL is
> not going to be doable in the immediate future. We therefore request
> the OVPL be considered for approval as is, on the assumption Sun are
> not going to make the "common changes" to the CDDL in the near future.
>
> Alex
>
>