qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Arnaud Simon <asi...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: NMS
Date Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:25:11 GMT
There is a legal doubt about NMS and it will subsist. This is why I was
suggesting that we leave a potential AMQP support to the NMS people. We
should therefore concentrate on straight WCF, BizTalk supports. 

On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 07:59 -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
> Robert Greig wrote:
> > On 11/06/07, Arnaud Simon <asimon@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Even the ActiveMQ guys cannot agree. As a potential Qpid implementation
> >> of NMS would be hosted by their project they should decide whether this
> >> is useful to have one and also take responsibility for potential legal
> >> aspects.
> >
> > OK but this impacts us in the sense that we would be doing the 
> > implementation?
> >
> > Surely we should not be putting effort into something where the legal
> > position is not clear? What are we supposed to say to our users? "Use
> > this but we can't decide whether it's violating a licence agreement"?
> >
> > RG
> 
> I have not read through all the threads on the topic, but if there is 
> legal doubt about it
> , it would make sense to explore all other alternatives first.
> 
> Carl.
> 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message