[openbeos] Re: Haiku & ACCESS talks clarification
- From: "François Revol" <revol@xxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 21:41:42 +0200 CEST
> "Are the recent talks between Access and Haiku a mere coincidence?"
>
> I am not totally sure of the intent of this question, but it does
> invite
> to speculation, perhaps to a possible involvement of Haiku in the
> recent
> events surrounding ZETA. In order to avoid any such speculation and
> the
> potential misinformation that it could lead to, I would like to set
> the
> record straight. I sent this information to the authors of the
> article,
> but only a little note that does not give the whole picture was added
> to
> the article, so here it is.
Thanks Jorge for stating it, that will hopefully set things straight
and stop the other speculations, at least on that list, which I recall
everyone is about software developpement, not juri-talk.
> My communication with David in connection with this request took
> place
> via email over a time span of approximately 6 months, during which
> David
> routed Haiku's request through the ACCESS legal department, and later
> provided the requirements for disclosure of the documents. The
> process
> came to a (happy) conclusion with the recent announcement titled
> "ACCESS
> Co. Releases BeBook and Be Newsletters" published on the Haiku
> website.
I still can't stop from wondering if the *reply* came at this date
without any other schedule, specially after 6 months, but at least the
request dates from way before. And I'll say no more as it doesn't
belong here. :)
> That's all there is to it. Some people may enjoy conspiracy theories
> and
The Truth is Out There(tm)...
> intrigue plots, but there was nothing of what the above-mentioned
> question in the article may intend to imply. I am also aware that
> some
> BeOS fans still dream about the possibility of the BeOS code being
> open
> sourced, but let me make this crystal clear: there was *absolutely
> nothing* discussed in that respect during my email exchange with
> David.
As I already mentionned several times, even if ACCESS wanted it it
couldn't happen in a simple way because it is a known fact that BeOS
contains several 3rd party licenced "technologies" (I hate this
overrated word... it's just code after all!) that can't be open without
the consent of their owner. Sorting out the which-is-which pieces would
take man-power which ACCESS has no reason to support because as they
said they can't make any money from it.
Besides, instead of wandering waiting for baked source code, you can
contribute to make R1 faster out without the need for it. ;)
I hope that answers the remaining bits, now please go back to work !
:D
François.
Other related posts:
