CNRI vs. BeOpen (was Re: Splitting c.l.py...)

[Aahz Maruch]

In article <LNBBLJKPBEHFEDALKOLCKENPGIAA.tim_one at email.msn.com>,
Tim Peters <tim_one at email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>[Alex <cut_me_out at hotmail.com>]
>> Is there a synopsis of the legal woes that befell python somewhere?
>> It sounds sort of interesting.
>
>[Jeremy Hylton]
>> It's not interesting <0.2 wink>.
>
>And it's even less interesting for me, as (unlike Jeremy) I never
>worked at CNRI so have no interest at all in their internal politics.
>From my POV, it looks almost exactly like a divorce, except that
>besides just arguing over custody of the children (Python's license
>makes that pretty much a non-issue over the long haul), they're also
>wrangling over who gets the kid's used clothes, the old security
>blanket, and the first tooth that fell out.  Separations are painful!
>Sometimes messy too.  This is apparently one of those.  I do believe
>both sides want Python to thrive, though.

I think what would be interesting is to know what effect this is having
on Python (e.g. is it delaying 1.6?).  It would also be nice to know if
there is an ETA for getting all this resolved.  It would be useful to
know what parts of the Python community are affected; I notice, for
example, that starship.python.net still says to send checks for PSA to
CNRI -- is that correct?

(My interest in the last question comes mainly because I'm getting ready
to upload my thread tutorial to a web site, and I'd prefer to use a
Python site rather than my own.)
--
                      --- Aahz (Copyright 2000 by aahz at netcom.com)

Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het    <*>     http://www.rahul.net/aahz/
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

"do you want my self-identities alphabetically, chronologically, or in
random order?"  -- Misha