[python-committers] formalising retirement as a Python committer
Sadly I have come to the conclusion that there is no realistic prospect of my being able to actively contribute to Python development in the foreseeable future given my current pursuits and interests, though I rely heavily on Python both personally and professionally. As a practical matter I have not actively participated in Python development in some years and as a consequence I don't think I have any valid keys still on record. Nor do I now have any operational OS/2 systems to support the Python port to that platform that was my primary interest and contribution. I would therefore request that appropriate administrative action be taken to close off any commit privileges previously granted to me that may still be active. Beyond the OS/2 port, it pleases me that I was able to make several small contributions of more general utility. While the announcement today of the planned move of the Python repository to GitHub has no bearing whatsoever on my decision, I would note that GitHub's requirement that a person only have one account - to be used for both personal activity and any activity on behalf of an employer - is of sufficient concern to me that had I decided to continue as a committer I would be seeking legal advice concerning my position. I say this as to date I have been able to satisfy my employer's requirements for clear separation of my personal activities, including my participation in Python development, from my activities as an employee. This has been possible by exclusively using only provably personal resources, including accounts and internet access, for personal activities. Such clear separation becomes much more difficult when resources such as accounts are shared between personal and employee roles, especially when being seen to do the right thing is as important as actually doing the right thing. My best wishes to all who have made Python what it is and for Python's future! Andrew MacIntyre. -- - Andrew I MacIntyre "These thoughts are mine alone..." E-mail: [email protected] (pref) | Snail: PO Box 370 [email protected] (alt) |Belconnen ACT 2616 Web:http://www.andymac.org/ |Australia --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Github accounts (was: formalising retirement as a Python committer)
On 02.01.2016 13:06, Andrew MacIntyre wrote: > While the announcement today of the planned move of the Python repository to > GitHub has no bearing > whatsoever on my decision, I would note that GitHub's requirement that a > person only have one > account - to be used for both personal activity and any activity on behalf of > an employer - is of > sufficient concern to me that had I decided to continue as a committer I > would be seeking legal > advice concerning my position. I say this as to date I have been able to > satisfy my employer's > requirements for clear separation of my personal activities, including my > participation in Python > development, from my activities as an employee. This has been possible by > exclusively using only > provably personal resources, including accounts and internet access, for > personal activities. Such > clear separation becomes much more difficult when resources such as accounts > are shared between > personal and employee roles, especially when being seen to do the right thing > is as important as > actually doing the right thing. You are making a good point which I believe we have not yet discussed. Github requires that "One person or legal entity may not maintain more than one free account." in A.7. of their ToCs: https://help.github.com/articles/github-terms-of-service/ So if you are using a free account for company purposes, you'd have to get a paid account for personal use to e.g. contribute to Python and clearly separate personal contributions from ones you make as employee. By using just one account, such a separation would be difficult or could cause problems for employees of companies which require clear separation of activities from personal ones. It would also create a problem for the PSF, since without a clear separation, we'd need a contrib form from the employer to be able to legally accept the contributions in such situations. Would any of the existing committers run into such a problem ? I guess the PSF could refund any Github charges incurred to remedy the situation. Their smallest plan is USD 7 per month and account, so that would mean costs of USD 84 per year and committer - this certainly within range of what the PSF can provide without problem. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, Jan 02 2016) >>> Python Projects, Coaching and Consulting ... http://www.egenix.com/ >>> Python Database Interfaces ... http://products.egenix.com/ >>> Plone/Zope Database Interfaces ... http://zope.egenix.com/ ::: We implement business ideas - efficiently in both time and costs ::: eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH Pastor-Loeh-Str.48 D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611 http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/ http://www.malemburg.com/ ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Github accounts (was: formalising retirement as a Python committer)
On 2 January 2016 at 13:46, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > I guess the PSF could refund any Github charges incurred to > remedy the situation. Their smallest plan is USD 7 per month > and account, so that would mean costs of USD 84 per year and > committer - this certainly within range of what the PSF can > provide without problem. Alternatively, would it be worth reaching out to Github to ask if they would be willing to allow an exception? The condition seems intended to disallow spamming or camping of accounts, which clearly isn't the case here. Note: I have no direct interest in this, as I only use my github account for personal activities, so the issue doesn't affect me. Paul ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Github accounts (was: formalising retirement as a Python committer)
On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 5:46 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > So if you are using a free account for company purposes, you'd > have to get a paid account for personal use to e.g. contribute > to Python and clearly separate personal contributions from > ones you make as employee. > In practice, I have seen the following common scenarios. * Companies and businesses, most often have a paid account with GitHub. This allows them use Github with the code which is not yet open source or will never be open source. It is simply using Github.com as an Infrastructure as a Service, which many companies will willingly do. If it is using this paid account is unsuitable for contributing to open source projects then a free account could be created by the contributor. * If the company encourages to use to free account, then I think, the company realizes that the person may contribute to, not just it's open source projects, but to other open source projects hosted in Github using that account and should be open to that. * A third scenario was mentioned by M.-A. Lemburg, wherein the company uses free account, but the company or the individual, more likely the latter, for some reason will not like to use the same account or other project contribution. In that situation, the choice is to buy a paid account. ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Github accounts (was: formalising retirement as a Python committer)
On 3 January 2016 at 00:12, Paul Moore wrote: > On 2 January 2016 at 13:46, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >> I guess the PSF could refund any Github charges incurred to >> remedy the situation. Their smallest plan is USD 7 per month >> and account, so that would mean costs of USD 84 per year and >> committer - this certainly within range of what the PSF can >> provide without problem. > > Alternatively, would it be worth reaching out to Github to ask if they > would be willing to allow an exception? The condition seems intended > to disallow spamming or camping of accounts, which clearly isn't the > case here. > > Note: I have no direct interest in this, as I only use my github > account for personal activities, so the issue doesn't affect me. I use my own GitHub account for both personal projects and for work, but Red Hat's open source contribution policies are probably the most liberal on the planet, so I don't have any need to separate them. However, it's also the case that if an employer is simultaneously: 1. Expecting employees to maintain a clear separation between personal and paid activity on GitHub; and 2. Refusing to pay for dedicated GitHub work accounts for their employees Then there's a contradiction between their expectations and their failure to provide employees with the resources needed to meet those expectations. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Github accounts (was: formalising retirement as a Python committer)
On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 at 07:14 Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 3 January 2016 at 00:12, Paul Moore wrote: > > On 2 January 2016 at 13:46, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > >> I guess the PSF could refund any Github charges incurred to > >> remedy the situation. Their smallest plan is USD 7 per month > >> and account, so that would mean costs of USD 84 per year and > >> committer - this certainly within range of what the PSF can > >> provide without problem. > > > > Alternatively, would it be worth reaching out to Github to ask if they > > would be willing to allow an exception? The condition seems intended > > to disallow spamming or camping of accounts, which clearly isn't the > > case here. > > > > Note: I have no direct interest in this, as I only use my github > > account for personal activities, so the issue doesn't affect me. > > I use my own GitHub account for both personal projects and for work, > but Red Hat's open source contribution policies are probably the most > liberal on the planet, so I don't have any need to separate them. > Ditto for me and Microsoft. > > However, it's also the case that if an employer is simultaneously: > > 1. Expecting employees to maintain a clear separation between personal > and paid activity on GitHub; and > 2. Refusing to pay for dedicated GitHub work accounts for their employees > > Then there's a contradiction between their expectations and their > failure to provide employees with the resources needed to meet those > expectations. > I also know of people whose company is being mean to them by saying "we expect you to use your single free account for us and it's your problem if you want a clean separation because we're too cheap to pay for your own account" getting around this by ignoring the ToS restriction. Obviously not everyone will feel comfortable doing that, but I have never known anyone to have their GitHub account shut down because they had separate work and personal accounts that were both on the free tier. But as MAL said, the PSF could easily cover the fee for a core dev to get a paid micro account if someone felt they really wanted it. ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Github accounts (was: formalising retirement as a Python committer)
Another idea I had is could someone reach out to another project like Django or Go that switched to GitHub and see how they handled this situation for contributors? I don't feel I'm in a good position to ask about this since I personally don't have this issue so I don't think I could judge what would be an acceptable solution beyond the paid micro account solution. On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 at 09:49 Brett Cannon wrote: > On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 at 07:14 Nick Coghlan wrote: > >> On 3 January 2016 at 00:12, Paul Moore wrote: >> > On 2 January 2016 at 13:46, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >> >> I guess the PSF could refund any Github charges incurred to >> >> remedy the situation. Their smallest plan is USD 7 per month >> >> and account, so that would mean costs of USD 84 per year and >> >> committer - this certainly within range of what the PSF can >> >> provide without problem. >> > >> > Alternatively, would it be worth reaching out to Github to ask if they >> > would be willing to allow an exception? The condition seems intended >> > to disallow spamming or camping of accounts, which clearly isn't the >> > case here. >> > >> > Note: I have no direct interest in this, as I only use my github >> > account for personal activities, so the issue doesn't affect me. >> >> I use my own GitHub account for both personal projects and for work, >> but Red Hat's open source contribution policies are probably the most >> liberal on the planet, so I don't have any need to separate them. >> > > Ditto for me and Microsoft. > > >> >> However, it's also the case that if an employer is simultaneously: >> >> 1. Expecting employees to maintain a clear separation between personal >> and paid activity on GitHub; and >> 2. Refusing to pay for dedicated GitHub work accounts for their employees >> >> Then there's a contradiction between their expectations and their >> failure to provide employees with the resources needed to meet those >> expectations. >> > > I also know of people whose company is being mean to them by saying "we > expect you to use your single free account for us and it's your problem if > you want a clean separation because we're too cheap to pay for your own > account" getting around this by ignoring the ToS restriction. Obviously not > everyone will feel comfortable doing that, but I have never known anyone to > have their GitHub account shut down because they had separate work and > personal accounts that were both on the free tier. > > But as MAL said, the PSF could easily cover the fee for a core dev to get > a paid micro account if someone felt they really wanted it. > ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Github accounts (was: formalising retirement as a Python committer)
For Django this has literally never come up. Alex On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > Another idea I had is could someone reach out to another project like > Django or Go that switched to GitHub and see how they handled this > situation for contributors? I don't feel I'm in a good position to ask > about this since I personally don't have this issue so I don't think I > could judge what would be an acceptable solution beyond the paid micro > account solution. > > On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 at 09:49 Brett Cannon wrote: > >> On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 at 07:14 Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >>> On 3 January 2016 at 00:12, Paul Moore wrote: >>> > On 2 January 2016 at 13:46, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >>> >> I guess the PSF could refund any Github charges incurred to >>> >> remedy the situation. Their smallest plan is USD 7 per month >>> >> and account, so that would mean costs of USD 84 per year and >>> >> committer - this certainly within range of what the PSF can >>> >> provide without problem. >>> > >>> > Alternatively, would it be worth reaching out to Github to ask if they >>> > would be willing to allow an exception? The condition seems intended >>> > to disallow spamming or camping of accounts, which clearly isn't the >>> > case here. >>> > >>> > Note: I have no direct interest in this, as I only use my github >>> > account for personal activities, so the issue doesn't affect me. >>> >>> I use my own GitHub account for both personal projects and for work, >>> but Red Hat's open source contribution policies are probably the most >>> liberal on the planet, so I don't have any need to separate them. >>> >> >> Ditto for me and Microsoft. >> >> >>> >>> However, it's also the case that if an employer is simultaneously: >>> >>> 1. Expecting employees to maintain a clear separation between personal >>> and paid activity on GitHub; and >>> 2. Refusing to pay for dedicated GitHub work accounts for their employees >>> >>> Then there's a contradiction between their expectations and their >>> failure to provide employees with the resources needed to meet those >>> expectations. >>> >> >> I also know of people whose company is being mean to them by saying "we >> expect you to use your single free account for us and it's your problem if >> you want a clean separation because we're too cheap to pay for your own >> account" getting around this by ignoring the ToS restriction. Obviously not >> everyone will feel comfortable doing that, but I have never known anyone to >> have their GitHub account shut down because they had separate work and >> personal accounts that were both on the free tier. >> >> But as MAL said, the PSF could easily cover the fee for a core dev to get >> a paid micro account if someone felt they really wanted it. >> > > ___ > python-committers mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > -- "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire) "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero GPG Key fingerprint: 125F 5C67 DFE9 4084 ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Github accounts (was: formalising retirement as a Python committer)
This hardly seems like a real problem, so let's not worry more about it until someone actually needs help solving this. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] formalising retirement as a Python committer
Andrew, Thanks for your contributions. You will be missed. Enjoy your new pursuits and interests! If you ever want to come back we'll make sure to accommodate you somehow. --Guido On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 5:06 AM, Andrew MacIntyre < [email protected]> wrote: > Sadly I have come to the conclusion that there is no realistic prospect of > my being able to actively contribute to Python development in the > foreseeable future given my current pursuits and interests, though I rely > heavily on Python both personally and professionally. > > As a practical matter I have not actively participated in Python > development in some years and as a consequence I don't think I have any > valid keys still on record. Nor do I now have any operational OS/2 systems > to support the Python port to that platform that was my primary interest > and contribution. > > I would therefore request that appropriate administrative action be taken > to close off any commit privileges previously granted to me that may still > be active. > > Beyond the OS/2 port, it pleases me that I was able to make several small > contributions of more general utility. > > While the announcement today of the planned move of the Python repository > to GitHub has no bearing whatsoever on my decision, I would note that > GitHub's requirement that a person only have one account - to be used for > both personal activity and any activity on behalf of an employer - is of > sufficient concern to me that had I decided to continue as a committer I > would be seeking legal advice concerning my position. I say this as to date > I have been able to satisfy my employer's requirements for clear separation > of my personal activities, including my participation in Python > development, from my activities as an employee. This has been possible by > exclusively using only provably personal resources, including accounts and > internet access, for personal activities. Such clear separation becomes > much more difficult when resources such as accounts are shared between > personal and employee roles, especially when being seen to do the right > thing is as important as actually doing the right thing. > > My best wishes to all who have made Python what it is and for Python's > future! > > Andrew MacIntyre. > > -- > - > Andrew I MacIntyre "These thoughts are mine alone..." > E-mail: [email protected] (pref) | Snail: PO Box 370 > [email protected] (alt) |Belconnen ACT 2616 > Web:http://www.andymac.org/ |Australia > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > ___ > python-committers mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] We will be moving to GitHub (hopefully) in 2016
Happy 2016 Brett! Thanks for all the care you've put into this decision. I should also mention that I am happy that as a community we're always willing to learn -- we've switched VCSes many times before and I expect we will again in the future. Each time things get better, and I'm looking forward to the implementation of this iteration, now that the decision is made. On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ethan Furman wrote: > On 01/01/2016 11:24 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > Happy 2016 everyone, and here is to hoping we will have an easier >> developer workflow by the end of this year! >> > > Thanks for doing this, Brett! > > I'm looking forward to an easier work flow. > > -- > ~Ethan~ > > > ___ > python-committers mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] We will be moving to GitHub (hopefully) in 2016
On 2 January 2016 at 05:24, Brett Cannon wrote: > If you want to read the reasons I chose GitHub over GitLab, see > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/core-workflow/2016-January/000345.html . > If you want to discuss the decision or help with the transition, please > subscribe to the core-workflow mailing list. Thanks for spearheading the decision making process here Brett - your involvement really helped me clarify the problems I was trying to solve back when I first wrote PEP 462, and also helped me make some important decisions about prioritisation of my own activities. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
