> If Eclipse are modifying the rules or clarifying them for you then I will wait until I see that, until then all I can comment on is the rules as printed on the Eclipse site which say all contributions must have signed paperwork.
I see what's happening. You are likely confusing Eclipse software projects with the Eclipse specification process. The specification process is a separate body from Eclipse projects. It provides a platform and framework for conducting specifications. Each specification has its own charter. Thus, the AsciiDoc spec will have its own charter and it will be the authority (not "eclipsed" by any higher authority). The main role of the Eclipse Foundation is to protect the process so it can be conducted without disruption or legal threat and that we have the resources to continue. They do not dictate the charter or who participates. Anything that suggests that is misinformation. -Dan On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 4:21 PM Lex Trotman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 at 06:35, Dan Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Its the Eclipse foundation, but you need to sign a legal agreement to > contribute, goodbye all non-corporate contributors. > > > > That is pure FUD and I would appreciate if you would not spread it for > the sake of the language. The process will be fully open and accessible to > all individuals. Corporate contributors have to sign the legal agreement > because it protects both them and Eclipse as they are legal entities. It > also guarantees the effort will be funded, because it's going to require > resources to run properly. > > > > If Eclipse are modifying the rules or clarifying them for you then I > will wait until I see that, until then all I can comment on is the > rules as printed on the Eclipse site which say all contributions must > have signed paperwork. > > > The Eclipse Foundation has made it clear that we run the spec and we > determine all the rules in the charter They are providing a legal framework > to ensure the process and output of that process are protected. We are a > self-determining group and have the final say in how it operates. I would > not allow it to be any other way. I think my reputation proceeds me on this > matter. > > Please don't take negative comments personally, I am just stating the > facts as I understand them, and since there was not even a reply to my > post on the topic much earlier in the year I can only assume nothing > has changed. > > Lex > > > > > -Dan > > > > -- > > Dan Allen | @mojavelinux | https://twitter.com/mojavelinux > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "asciidoc" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to [email protected]. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/asciidoc/CAKeHnO79UboAGE0JLXcWobpt8e-pggE36vSoorPqfmxZnLPSog%40mail.gmail.com > . > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "asciidoc" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/asciidoc/CAKhWKDP3yU_pCTbxE0NfaYuYMtfrj-3PxPZxaM-j2qedLaVY6g%40mail.gmail.com > . > -- Dan Allen | @mojavelinux | https://twitter.com/mojavelinux -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "asciidoc" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/asciidoc/CAKeHnO7st50S%2B_LZ6qG1EjzC6wKKtY4-BLkaA4WcgsUD-Sq16w%40mail.gmail.com.
