On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 18:12, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:
> Betcha it would be easy to do so, if only we can get the institutions 
> in line and some consensus for a license.

And that, my dear listeners, remains the $1000 question for today. 

The issue is of course:
- how, when are we going to take concerted action;
- when are we going to decide that the institutions are not coming into
line and keep hurting ourselves with license discussions and
restrictions on what to include for a possible future?

As a realist, I don't think they are going to bother. There's nothing to
gain either for Apple or for Disney, and there's a decent cost
associated with it (I cannot imagine that they are simply going to sign
on a license switch without due process involving a legal councel,
etcetera). It'd be nice to think that they would be interested in good
PR for us folks, 1000-and-some hackers around a great product, but I
don't think so. 

As an idealist, I say we should attempt it nevertheless. However, we
should *do* something (which, I fear, SqC should come into action)
instead of debating this every 6 months. 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20030326/d9137df7/attachment.pgp