----- Original Message -----
From: "Koen Martens" <spf(_at_)metro(_dot_)cx>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Has Meng sold us out to M$?
On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 09:55:07AM +0200, jpinkerton wrote:
Well - I tried to contact Meng directly about this, and other matters,
but I
got no response. :-(
I am not technically competent enough to "front" the PR job, and my
daily
life would prevent me from travelling to the various meetings.
There were a total of some 7 volunteers asked for by Meng. As far as I
know
none are filled, people preferring to d that part of a job they feel
competent to do, and have time for.
Perhaps this says more about the job specifications than the community.
One of those positions has been volunteerd for: the 'customer support'
part. I have set up an RT and together with 3 other volunteers we are
now handling the spf requests coming in via the spf.pobox.com site.
That is excellent news :-)
Doing what Meng is currently doing for spf is a big job, and unless
others volunteer to take some of the work of of his shoulders, we should
be carefull in critisizing what he does.
The criticism is aimed at the subversion of spf by M$, with Mengs apparent
assistance.
On the other hand, the involvement with microsoft makes it increasingly
difficult to find volunteers obviously. Consider Wayne who has had very
good technical contributions, who now is not involved at all in spf
development anymore because of the microsoft ordeal. This is a great
loss for the community if you ask me.
This certainly is a great loss. But we are going to find it increasingly
difficult to get anyone to work on spf when it is apparent that it is going
to be absorbed by M$. Why work for M$ for free?
I am afraid the spf community is going to suffer the same fate as the
marid working group if this goes on, which would mean that microsoft has
won :(
Well - it's up to us to not let that happen, and one step in that direction
is for Meng to stop playing politics with M$ and using spf as the football !
We need a clear statement of intent from Meng before it is worth doing much
more. Without a clear statement, supported by an equally clear statement
from M$, I wouldn't be surprised if the spf project collapses.
We have seen Mark and others reasons for not wanting spfv1 to be used with
PRA on technical grounds, and we have seen various peoples comments in the
same vein for reasons to do with the licence/patent issues. Trying to use
spfv1 with PRA is obviously not what the spf community wants, so why is Meng
persisting in promoting the idea?
It is this very persistence which creates the image of a man deep inside M$
pockets. If Meng were not in M$ pockets and was looking for a truly
technical solution, he would be happy to leave spfv1 alone and move on to
spfv2, incorporating whatever technical wizardry is necessary to make it
usable by *ALL* - in the true spirit of Open Source.
It is up to Meng to clear his name now.
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492