Remy Maucherat wrote:it is obvious Apache has the notion of company contributions.
Companies authorize individuals where their employment agreement might be in conflict with a CLA, and companies can provide a Software Grant in the case where the existing IP is owned by the company. This applies equally to IBM, Sun, BEA, Gluecode, DevTech, or JBoss.
This is an accurate legal description but not really an issue to me. Clarifying the IP flow of company -> committer -> ASF would suggest that we would be ok to say "Tomcat by Apache and lead contributor JBoss via Remy."
None of this is new. It has been discussed at length, and is fairly well established. This is a legal distinction having nothing to do with the promotional wording of the Jolt awards.
Big +1 to Jolt needing a correction.
I don't quite know how to feel JBoss's desire to promote their contributions to the ASF. I'm guessing IBM, Sun, and BEA contribute more to the ASF than JBoss does, but these larger contributions come from companies that do not have a strategic goal of marketing themselves as open source leaders.
I think one of the great things about the ASF is that it does allow commercial involvement in their projects. I'd love us to figure out how we ARE comfortable thanking JBoss, IBM, etc.. rather than only reacting when we feel a line is crossed.
-- Serge Knystautas Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
