On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 01:45:08AM -0800, 'Sarah GOMEY' via Git for human 
beings wrote:

Disclaimer (which might get a bit more obvious later on): I (and anyone else
on this mailing list) do not "represent Git" in any way; anything written
below is my personal opinion.

> Hope this email finds you well.
> I'm a master student at ESSEC working on a research project on open 
> and the business models built around it. We'd like to know more about 

First thing first. Git is a piece of so-called free software [1], and as 
quite many things which are taken for granted when we discuss commercial
software projects simply do not apply to Git.

> How is it maintained?

There exists an official "tree" (a regularly updated snapshot of the 
published using multiple venues including Github [2]. Most of the features
there get integrated by the official maintainer - Junio Hamano [3], but 
folks among the active developers have commit access to.

Changes to Git gets discussed on a dedicated mailing list. Proposed code
changes (patches and patch series) are supposed to be submitted directly to
the mailing list as well, but there exist a helper Github-hosted tool to
assist with drive-by contributions [4].

Anyone if free to submit patches, report bugs and propose features. Patches
and propositions are discussed - again, by anyone, - on the mailing list.
Code reviews are usually made by the set of core developers - basically 
who are active on the project.
Some, but not all, of these developers are actually working in different
commercial entities making use of Git (including, but not limited to,
Microsoft and Google).

Also note that there exist an "official" (in the sense of "being blessed" as
such) "continuous fork" of Git intended to make Git work on Windows; it's
called Git for Windows, is maintained separately but has similar licensing
terms to Git. Some Windows-related code gets integrated into the baseline 
from time to time, and GfW generally closely follows the Git's release
schedule. Some of the GfW developers are also Git's core developers.

> Do you generate any revenue or is it solely based on 
> donations through the Software Freedom Conservancy?

I would say this point does not apply to Git as it is not a so-called
"open-core" project in the spirit of MySQL/MariaDB or GitLab - where the 
is mainly controlled by a commercial entity which gives "the core part" for
free, but you can pay for extra features. Git is fully free in this sense, 
as such I would posit it does not generate any revenue "for itself". It may
generate revenue for its commercial users - such as via paid plans on 
but there it's Github which is "receiving" that revenue.

> Since GitHub is built on Git, does Git have an agreement with them?

The Git's license does not oblige any entity which uses it to participate in
any agreement. Note that F/OSS licensing is about protecting the code (and 
users) - as opposed to protecting intellectual property of an entity owning
the code.

 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software
 [2] https://github.com/git/git
 [3] https://gitster.livejournal.com/
 [4] https://gitgitgadget.github.io/

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 

Reply via email to