Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
That leaves taxes which aren't a factor here :-)
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 6:48:51 PM UTC+11, stu...@brankovukelic.com wrote: It is an open question whether distribution of such modified copies are legally allowed to still be called web2py if Massimo has sole legal rights on the name. Thus, you may be able to do that, but you likely would have to call it something other than web2py. Well, uneless dead people can sue you in court, it's probably as legal as written permission Sorry, his heir could most likely sue you. Graham -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
I would like to see web2py becomes matured in a similar model as Drupal, at lease with a PR manager, a release manager, a documentation manager, and a newbie-assistance manager, together with a platform that attracts developers and encourages contribution. Massimo's role should be in developing and setting visions. More managers also means more coordination overhead for Massimo. What if he's really only interested in designing and writing code ? I know I would be :)
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Also, what about the book? Would the community have to start from scratch on new documentation? The online version says modified content cannot be reproduced. Anthony On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:21:20 AM UTC-5, Graham Dumpleton wrote: On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 5:49:17 PM UTC+11, Magnitus wrote: Wow, some heavy duty concerns in this thread... I'm not fully versed in the detailed legalities of those things, but I'll elaborate things as I understand them and perhaps I can be corrected if I'm wrong... Basically, I get Web2py under the GLP licence. Under that licence, I can: 1) Use and distribute the unmodified web framework indefinitely as long as I provide a copy of the licence and the source code 2) Modify the source code of the Framework as I see fit as long as long as I make an open source copy of my modification available with an original copy of the licence and indicate how it was modified from the original source The above would apply to any copy I downloaded when the licence was in force, even if say, Massimo was struck by a meteor and Web2py stopped being distributed under such a licence. So, the main worry isn't that if Massimo is eaten by raiding cannibals, people won't have the legal means to distribute future modified copies of Web2py, but rather that nobody may have the expertize or interest to do so, correct? It is an open question whether distribution of such modified copies are legally allowed to still be called web2py if Massimo has sole legal rights on the name. Thus, you may be able to do that, but you likely would have to call it something other than web2py. Graham On Dec 28, 12:28 pm, mdipierro mdi...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: Afoundationis a corporation and, believe it or not, in US a corporation is a person: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/01/the... The Djangofoundationwas created two years ago (and Django is 4-5 years older thanweb2py). Do you have any evidence that it has improved its popularity: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? Python has afoundationand it looks to me it is always broke. I just spoke with a recruiter that was looking for Python programmers for a big US bank and I complained that his client relied on a product (Python) and did not make any donation to support it. The python developers are not supported by thefoundation, as far as I know. Afoundationhas costs higher than a corporation and I do not get enough donation to cover those costs. A corporation (experts4solutions) is cheaper (it still costs at least $500/year of my own money). Moreover afoundationimplies that design decision are taken by committee and I do not believe in that. I consult with core developers and users on important matters but I think there has to be one individual who ultimately takes decisions about the direction of the project. We have explored the possibility of joining the free software conservatory but we got no feedback. Rails is owned by a corporation (37signals) which is owned by one individual. It seems to be the model works well for them. In my case I decided not to pass copyright and trademark to experts4solutions because I thought some would have criticized it. I am not the only committer to the mainweb2pybranch. Jonathan L. is also a committer and will use his power in case I am incapacitated. Yet, that should not be a crowded space in order to avoid internal conflicts. I will write a will that explains what happens to theweb2pytrademark and copyright in case I die. Massimo On Dec 28, 2:12 am, Graham Dumpleton graha...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or afoundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation orfoundationand copyright still held by the continuing entity. In your case, if you get hit by a bus driven by a disgruntled Python developer, then no one else can simply take over the software as it is now, using any existing legal structure etc. Instead it would as you say need to be forked and in being forked legally may even need to change names as a result if you have sole rights over the original name. So, your own words support the contention expressed by some
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Right. I will make sure in my will web2py trademark is released on my death. On Dec 29, 2:41 am, Graham Dumpleton graham.dumple...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 6:48:51 PM UTC+11, stu...@brankovukelic.com wrote: It is an open question whether distribution of such modified copies are legally allowed to still be called web2py if Massimo has sole legal rights on the name. Thus, you may be able to do that, but you likely would have to call it something other than web2py. Well, uneless dead people can sue you in court, it's probably as legal as written permission Sorry, his heir could most likely sue you. Graham -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
I will amend my will to release the book under an open source license. You guys really think my heirs even know what I do in front of the computer all day? Massimo On Dec 29, 10:26 am, Anthony abasta...@gmail.com wrote: Also, what about the book? Would the community have to start from scratch on new documentation? The online version says modified content cannot be reproduced. Anthony On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:21:20 AM UTC-5, Graham Dumpleton wrote: On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 5:49:17 PM UTC+11, Magnitus wrote: Wow, some heavy duty concerns in this thread... I'm not fully versed in the detailed legalities of those things, but I'll elaborate things as I understand them and perhaps I can be corrected if I'm wrong... Basically, I get Web2py under the GLP licence. Under that licence, I can: 1) Use and distribute the unmodified web framework indefinitely as long as I provide a copy of the licence and the source code 2) Modify the source code of the Framework as I see fit as long as long as I make an open source copy of my modification available with an original copy of the licence and indicate how it was modified from the original source The above would apply to any copy I downloaded when the licence was in force, even if say, Massimo was struck by a meteor and Web2py stopped being distributed under such a licence. So, the main worry isn't that if Massimo is eaten by raiding cannibals, people won't have the legal means to distribute future modified copies of Web2py, but rather that nobody may have the expertize or interest to do so, correct? It is an open question whether distribution of such modified copies are legally allowed to still be called web2py if Massimo has sole legal rights on the name. Thus, you may be able to do that, but you likely would have to call it something other than web2py. Graham On Dec 28, 12:28 pm, mdipierro mdi...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: Afoundationis a corporation and, believe it or not, in US a corporation is a person: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/01/the... The Djangofoundationwas created two years ago (and Django is 4-5 years older thanweb2py). Do you have any evidence that it has improved its popularity: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? Python has afoundationand it looks to me it is always broke. I just spoke with a recruiter that was looking for Python programmers for a big US bank and I complained that his client relied on a product (Python) and did not make any donation to support it. The python developers are not supported by thefoundation, as far as I know. Afoundationhas costs higher than a corporation and I do not get enough donation to cover those costs. A corporation (experts4solutions) is cheaper (it still costs at least $500/year of my own money). Moreover afoundationimplies that design decision are taken by committee and I do not believe in that. I consult with core developers and users on important matters but I think there has to be one individual who ultimately takes decisions about the direction of the project. We have explored the possibility of joining the free software conservatory but we got no feedback. Rails is owned by a corporation (37signals) which is owned by one individual. It seems to be the model works well for them. In my case I decided not to pass copyright and trademark to experts4solutions because I thought some would have criticized it. I am not the only committer to the mainweb2pybranch. Jonathan L. is also a committer and will use his power in case I am incapacitated. Yet, that should not be a crowded space in order to avoid internal conflicts. I will write a will that explains what happens to theweb2pytrademark and copyright in case I die. Massimo On Dec 28, 2:12 am, Graham Dumpleton graha...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or afoundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation orfoundationand copyright still held by the continuing entity. In your case, if you get hit by a bus driven by a disgruntled Python developer, then no one else can simply take over the software as it is now, using any existing legal structure etc. Instead it would as you say need to be forked and in
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:04 PM, mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: I will amend my will to release the book under an open source license. You guys really think my heirs even know what I do in front of the computer all day? I dunno, but could you ask them if they'd sue people who would dare continue the web2py legacy if you ever die (that is, if you're not immortal or anything like that). ;) -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Perhaps try the Software Conservance again? I see that they recently accepted PyPy and Git On Dec 28, 9:28 am, mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: A foundation is a corporation and, believe it or not, in US a corporation is a person: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/01/the... The Django foundation was created two years ago (and Django is 4-5 years older than web2py). Do you have any evidence that it has improved its popularity: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? Python has a foundation and it looks to me it is always broke. I just spoke with a recruiter that was looking for Python programmers for a big US bank and I complained that his client relied on a product (Python) and did not make any donation to support it. The python developers are not supported by the foundation, as far as I know. A foundation has costs higher than a corporation and I do not get enough donation to cover those costs. A corporation (experts4solutions) is cheaper (it still costs at least $500/year of my own money). Moreover a foundation implies that design decision are taken by committee and I do not believe in that. I consult with core developers and users on important matters but I think there has to be one individual who ultimately takes decisions about the direction of the project. We have explored the possibility of joining the free software conservatory but we got no feedback. Rails is owned by a corporation (37signals) which is owned by one individual. It seems to be the model works well for them. In my case I decided not to pass copyright and trademark to experts4solutions because I thought some would have criticized it. I am not the only committer to the main web2py branch. Jonathan L. is also a committer and will use his power in case I am incapacitated. Yet, that should not be a crowded space in order to avoid internal conflicts. I will write a will that explains what happens to the web2py trademark and copyright in case I die. Massimo On Dec 28, 2:12 am, Graham Dumpleton graham.dumple...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or a foundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation or foundation and copyright still held by the continuing entity. In your case, if you get hit by a bus driven by a disgruntled Python developer, then no one else can simply take over the software as it is now, using any existing legal structure etc. Instead it would as you say need to be forked and in being forked legally may even need to change names as a result if you have sole rights over the original name. So, your own words support the contention expressed by some that it is 'single person framework' as far as ownership and control is concerned, an issue which is distinct from whether or not you have other contributors. Graham The purpose of the foundation is to collect money for development and advertising. Other organization like Rails have chose to create a company instead of a foundation. We have created a company (experts4solutions.com) whose purpose is to promote skilled web2py professionals (and you can joins), foster web2py projects, sell consulting and long term support contracts. This was advertised here a few months ago. Some users have joined. Massimo On Dec 27, 9:46 pm, Pepe Araya pepe...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, some news about this topic? I think 2 things are going in favor of creating a foundation or [whatever]: 1. the community has grown a lot. 2. in all the reviews I read about web2py, always, always, ALWAYS!!! say it is a single-person framework and that takes away the future security of their development. kind regards Pepe
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
This thread can be historical like that one: http://www.python.org/search/hypermail/python-1994q2/1040.html which was the start of PSF
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Maybe they think you are watching youtube videos :p On Dec 30, 1:04 am, mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: I will amend my will to release the book under an open source license. You guys really think my heirs even know what I do in front of the computer all day? Massimo On Dec 29, 10:26 am, Anthony abasta...@gmail.com wrote: Also, what about the book? Would the community have to start from scratch on new documentation? The online version says modified content cannot be reproduced. Anthony On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:21:20 AM UTC-5, Graham Dumpleton wrote: On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 5:49:17 PM UTC+11, Magnitus wrote: Wow, some heavy duty concerns in this thread... I'm not fully versed in the detailed legalities of those things, but I'll elaborate things as I understand them and perhaps I can be corrected if I'm wrong... Basically, I get Web2py under the GLP licence. Under that licence, I can: 1) Use and distribute the unmodified web framework indefinitely as long as I provide a copy of the licence and the source code 2) Modify the source code of the Framework as I see fit as long as long as I make an open source copy of my modification available with an original copy of the licence and indicate how it was modified from the original source The above would apply to any copy I downloaded when the licence was in force, even if say, Massimo was struck by a meteor and Web2py stopped being distributed under such a licence. So, the main worry isn't that if Massimo is eaten by raiding cannibals, people won't have the legal means to distribute future modified copies of Web2py, but rather that nobody may have the expertize or interest to do so, correct? It is an open question whether distribution of such modified copies are legally allowed to still be called web2py if Massimo has sole legal rights on the name. Thus, you may be able to do that, but you likely would have to call it something other than web2py. Graham On Dec 28, 12:28 pm, mdipierro mdi...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: Afoundationis a corporation and, believe it or not, in US a corporation is a person: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/01/the... The Djangofoundationwas created two years ago (and Django is 4-5 years older thanweb2py). Do you have any evidence that it has improved its popularity: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? Python has afoundationand it looks to me it is always broke. I just spoke with a recruiter that was looking for Python programmers for a big US bank and I complained that his client relied on a product (Python) and did not make any donation to support it. The python developers are not supported by thefoundation, as far as I know. Afoundationhas costs higher than a corporation and I do not get enough donation to cover those costs. A corporation (experts4solutions) is cheaper (it still costs at least $500/year of my own money). Moreover afoundationimplies that design decision are taken by committee and I do not believe in that. I consult with core developers and users on important matters but I think there has to be one individual who ultimately takes decisions about the direction of the project. We have explored the possibility of joining the free software conservatory but we got no feedback. Rails is owned by a corporation (37signals) which is owned by one individual. It seems to be the model works well for them. In my case I decided not to pass copyright and trademark to experts4solutions because I thought some would have criticized it. I am not the only committer to the mainweb2pybranch. Jonathan L. is also a committer and will use his power in case I am incapacitated. Yet, that should not be a crowded space in order to avoid internal conflicts. I will write a will that explains what happens to theweb2pytrademark and copyright in case I die. Massimo On Dec 28, 2:12 am, Graham Dumpleton graha...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or afoundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation orfoundationand copyright still held by the continuing entity. In your case, if
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Bruno Rocha rochacbr...@gmail.com wrote: This thread can be historical like that one: http://www.python.org/search/hypermail/python-1994q2/1040.html which was the start of PSF Why are Westerners so obsessed with death? That's quite amazing. -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
It is more that people in US are obsessed with lawsuits. ;-) On Dec 29, 4:30 pm, Branko Vukelić stu...@brankovukelic.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Bruno Rocha rochacbr...@gmail.com wrote: This thread can be historical like that one: http://www.python.org/search/hypermail/python-1994q2/1040.html which was the start of PSF Why are Westerners so obsessed with death? That's quite amazing. -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.comhttp://www.brankovukelic.com/
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
2010/12/30 mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu: It is more that people in US are obsessed with lawsuits. ;-) Lawsuits and death. Very nice. :) -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
They will figure it out, they can always check out Wikipedia for instruction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_Dictator_For_Life :) On Dec 29, 12:04 pm, mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: I will amend my will to release the book under an open source license. You guys really think my heirs even know what I do in front of the computer all day? Massimo On Dec 29, 10:26 am, Anthony abasta...@gmail.com wrote: Also, what about the book? Would the community have to start from scratch on new documentation? The online version says modified content cannot be reproduced. Anthony On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:21:20 AM UTC-5, Graham Dumpleton wrote: On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 5:49:17 PM UTC+11, Magnitus wrote: Wow, some heavy duty concerns in this thread... I'm not fully versed in the detailed legalities of those things, but I'll elaborate things as I understand them and perhaps I can be corrected if I'm wrong... Basically, I get Web2py under the GLP licence. Under that licence, I can: 1) Use and distribute the unmodified web framework indefinitely as long as I provide a copy of the licence and the source code 2) Modify the source code of the Framework as I see fit as long as long as I make an open source copy of my modification available with an original copy of the licence and indicate how it was modified from the original source The above would apply to any copy I downloaded when the licence was in force, even if say, Massimo was struck by a meteor and Web2py stopped being distributed under such a licence. So, the main worry isn't that if Massimo is eaten by raiding cannibals, people won't have the legal means to distribute future modified copies of Web2py, but rather that nobody may have the expertize or interest to do so, correct? It is an open question whether distribution of such modified copies are legally allowed to still be called web2py if Massimo has sole legal rights on the name. Thus, you may be able to do that, but you likely would have to call it something other than web2py. Graham On Dec 28, 12:28 pm, mdipierro mdi...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: Afoundationis a corporation and, believe it or not, in US a corporation is a person: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/01/the... The Djangofoundationwas created two years ago (and Django is 4-5 years older thanweb2py). Do you have any evidence that it has improved its popularity: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? Python has afoundationand it looks to me it is always broke. I just spoke with a recruiter that was looking for Python programmers for a big US bank and I complained that his client relied on a product (Python) and did not make any donation to support it. The python developers are not supported by thefoundation, as far as I know. Afoundationhas costs higher than a corporation and I do not get enough donation to cover those costs. A corporation (experts4solutions) is cheaper (it still costs at least $500/year of my own money). Moreover afoundationimplies that design decision are taken by committee and I do not believe in that. I consult with core developers and users on important matters but I think there has to be one individual who ultimately takes decisions about the direction of the project. We have explored the possibility of joining the free software conservatory but we got no feedback. Rails is owned by a corporation (37signals) which is owned by one individual. It seems to be the model works well for them. In my case I decided not to pass copyright and trademark to experts4solutions because I thought some would have criticized it. I am not the only committer to the mainweb2pybranch. Jonathan L. is also a committer and will use his power in case I am incapacitated. Yet, that should not be a crowded space in order to avoid internal conflicts. I will write a will that explains what happens to theweb2pytrademark and copyright in case I die. Massimo On Dec 28, 2:12 am, Graham Dumpleton graha...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or afoundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or a foundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation or foundation and copyright still held by the continuing entity. In your case, if you get hit by a bus driven by a disgruntled Python developer, then no one else can simply take over the software as it is now, using any existing legal structure etc. Instead it would as you say need to be forked and in being forked legally may even need to change names as a result if you have sole rights over the original name. So, your own words support the contention expressed by some that it is 'single person framework' as far as ownership and control is concerned, an issue which is distinct from whether or not you have other contributors. Graham The purpose of the foundation is to collect money for development and advertising. Other organization like Rails have chose to create a company instead of a foundation. We have created a company (experts4solutions.com) whose purpose is to promote skilled web2py professionals (and you can joins), foster web2py projects, sell consulting and long term support contracts. This was advertised here a few months ago. Some users have joined. Massimo On Dec 27, 9:46 pm, Pepe Araya pepe...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, some news about this topic? I think 2 things are going in favor of creating a foundation or [whatever]: 1. the community has grown a lot. 2. in all the reviews I read about web2py, always, always, ALWAYS!!! say it is a single-person framework and that takes away the future security of their development. kind regards Pepe
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Gary is right.
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Unless Massimo has already willed the copyright and other web2py IP to ...?
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Sorry Graham, I meant you are right. On Dec 28, 3:47 am, weheh richard_gor...@verizon.net wrote: Gary is right.
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
A foundation is a corporation and, believe it or not, in US a corporation is a person: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/01/the-corporation-is-a-legal-person-get-over-it.html The Django foundation was created two years ago (and Django is 4-5 years older than web2py). Do you have any evidence that it has improved its popularity: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? Python has a foundation and it looks to me it is always broke. I just spoke with a recruiter that was looking for Python programmers for a big US bank and I complained that his client relied on a product (Python) and did not make any donation to support it. The python developers are not supported by the foundation, as far as I know. A foundation has costs higher than a corporation and I do not get enough donation to cover those costs. A corporation (experts4solutions) is cheaper (it still costs at least $500/year of my own money). Moreover a foundation implies that design decision are taken by committee and I do not believe in that. I consult with core developers and users on important matters but I think there has to be one individual who ultimately takes decisions about the direction of the project. We have explored the possibility of joining the free software conservatory but we got no feedback. Rails is owned by a corporation (37signals) which is owned by one individual. It seems to be the model works well for them. In my case I decided not to pass copyright and trademark to experts4solutions because I thought some would have criticized it. I am not the only committer to the main web2py branch. Jonathan L. is also a committer and will use his power in case I am incapacitated. Yet, that should not be a crowded space in order to avoid internal conflicts. I will write a will that explains what happens to the web2py trademark and copyright in case I die. Massimo On Dec 28, 2:12 am, Graham Dumpleton graham.dumple...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or a foundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation or foundation and copyright still held by the continuing entity. In your case, if you get hit by a bus driven by a disgruntled Python developer, then no one else can simply take over the software as it is now, using any existing legal structure etc. Instead it would as you say need to be forked and in being forked legally may even need to change names as a result if you have sole rights over the original name. So, your own words support the contention expressed by some that it is 'single person framework' as far as ownership and control is concerned, an issue which is distinct from whether or not you have other contributors. Graham The purpose of the foundation is to collect money for development and advertising. Other organization like Rails have chose to create a company instead of a foundation. We have created a company (experts4solutions.com) whose purpose is to promote skilled web2py professionals (and you can joins), foster web2py projects, sell consulting and long term support contracts. This was advertised here a few months ago. Some users have joined. Massimo On Dec 27, 9:46 pm, Pepe Araya pepe...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, some news about this topic? I think 2 things are going in favor of creating a foundation or [whatever]: 1. the community has grown a lot. 2. in all the reviews I read about web2py, always, always, ALWAYS!!! say it is a single-person framework and that takes away the future security of their development. kind regards Pepe
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
For what it's worth, here's my 2 cents: I think the concern that web2py is a one-man framework and how the makes enterprises (big guys) adopt web2py is a valid concern. Although in theory, people can simply fork web2py when Massimo no longer commits to the project, for whichever reason, from a bystander's point of view, it doesn't seem that easy. I am not talking about a legal perspective, I am talking about the meat of the matter. When I look at web2py's project on Google, there are a dozen developers. And most of the fixes are done by Massimo. And I maybe wrong, but I don't think web2py has a #2 guy yet (in terms of intimate technical know-how or time commitment). So the question: who can take over web2py, if Massimo no longer commits to it for whatever reason? It is not clear. So I think this concern is legit. At the same time, I think forming legal entities might not effectively address this concern. It might even hurt it with much legal and administrative overhead. Drupal did not form any legal entity until it was really established with hundreds of developers and thousands modules. I think the real concern is that we need #2, #3, etc. guys, who know web2py as much as Massimo. I don't have an answer to this, but I think one way has to do with documentation, or rather a platform that assists developers to really understand the inner workings of web2py to make it really natural for them contribute when something goes wrong. Drawing a lesson from Drupal, it has a beatiful API documentation system, a beautiful bug reporting mechanism. And it is a magnitude more complex than web2py. In summary, I think one way to address this concern is establish a platform so that it really helps developers learn about the inner workings of web2py, fix and report bugs, etc.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 6:28 PM, mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? FTR, the graph is for the 'keyword' Django, which can be many things, and doesn't reflect the popularity of either the keyword or the Django project. The overall volume of searches for the keyword includes also items like Django Reinhardt, etc. Here is a bit more realistic trend graph: http://trends.google.com/websites?q=www.djangoproject.comsa=N -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
This is incorrect. You should look at the thanks in the commit log. I am not happy with Ranking contributors but Jonathan L., Thadeus B., Mariano R., Alvaro J., Iceberg to name a few. They know web2py as well as I do (and some parts better). Massimo On Dec 28, 12:03 pm, VP vtp2...@gmail.com wrote: For what it's worth, here's my 2 cents: I think the concern that web2py is a one-man framework and how the makes enterprises (big guys) adopt web2py is a valid concern. Although in theory, people can simply fork web2py when Massimo no longer commits to the project, for whichever reason, from a bystander's point of view, it doesn't seem that easy. I am not talking about a legal perspective, I am talking about the meat of the matter. When I look at web2py's project on Google, there are a dozen developers. And most of the fixes are done by Massimo. And I maybe wrong, but I don't think web2py has a #2 guy yet (in terms of intimate technical know-how or time commitment). So the question: who can take over web2py, if Massimo no longer commits to it for whatever reason? It is not clear. So I think this concern is legit. At the same time, I think forming legal entities might not effectively address this concern. It might even hurt it with much legal and administrative overhead. Drupal did not form any legal entity until it was really established with hundreds of developers and thousands modules. I think the real concern is that we need #2, #3, etc. guys, who know web2py as much as Massimo. I don't have an answer to this, but I think one way has to do with documentation, or rather a platform that assists developers to really understand the inner workings of web2py to make it really natural for them contribute when something goes wrong. Drawing a lesson from Drupal, it has a beatiful API documentation system, a beautiful bug reporting mechanism. And it is a magnitude more complex than web2py. In summary, I think one way to address this concern is establish a platform so that it really helps developers learn about the inner workings of web2py, fix and report bugs, etc.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
So the question: who can take over web2py, if Massimo no longer commits to it for whatever reason? It is not clear. Looking at people list at google code page, I see Jlundell with comitter role. http://code.google.com/p/web2py/people/list Other contributors can write code reviews and send patches to Massimo or Jlundell to apply (I think it is OK because they are who knows web2py core very better) -- Bruno Rocha http://about.me/rochacbruno/bio
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
I think we're OK for now. While there is a small perceptual problem of web2py being a single person's effort, I think at this stage it is beneficial for Massimo to continue with his rapid and prudent improvements. The best thing now is for more people to become web2py experts. There's a lot of knowledge to be gained and distributed without needing commit status.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
I think web2py (Massimo) is moving in the right direction making web2py more modular (dal) or using some ready solution (rocket or cherrypy server before) doing so we can easily get experts for different modules
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Dec 28, 2010, at 11:05 AM, Bruno Rocha wrote: So the question: who can take over web2py, if Massimo no longer commits to it for whatever reason? It is not clear. Looking at people list at google code page, I see Jlundell with comitter role. http://code.google.com/p/web2py/people/list Other contributors can write code reviews and send patches to Massimo or Jlundell to apply (I think it is OK because they are who knows web2py core very better) I'm acting as a kind of emergency backup; ordinarily patches should go to Massimo.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Should we push the expert4solutions brand a bit more? Yes but, not too much IMHO. That would suffice for some time eventually expert4solutions should care about creating a foundation or other amenities if there is enough busine$$ or investment on web2py. mic 2010/12/28 pbreit pbreitenb...@gmail.com: I think we're OK for now. While there is a small perceptual problem of web2py being a single person's effort, I think at this stage it is beneficial for Massimo to continue with his rapid and prudent improvements. The best thing now is for more people to become web2py experts. There's a lot of knowledge to be gained and distributed without needing commit status.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
+1 we don't want too many cooks without a head chef.
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
I love the fact that if I have a problem with web2py and asked a question, Massimo will likely answer it. But the perceptual problem of web2py is a single-person effort is real. Massimo fixes most of the bugs (it seems so). Massimo is mainly responsible for PR. Massimo is in charge of experts4solution (it appears so). Massimo is mainly in charge of documentation (the book) (it appears so). Note that these are not necessary bad things. But the concern is real. Now, you can say this issue should not be a concern (i.e. we are okay with the current setup). Then that's a different perspective, a different story. Rapid improvement is great. But the issue is not related to rapid development. Note that I'm playing the role of a devil advocate. I'm not criticizing. The current set up is perfect for me. I think we're OK for now. While there is a small perceptual problem of web2py being a single person's effort, I think at this stage it is beneficial for Massimo to continue with his rapid and prudent improvements. The best thing now is for more people to become web2py experts. There's a lot of knowledge to be gained and distributed without needing commit status.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Dec 28, 2010, at 11:54 AM, VP wrote: I love the fact that if I have a problem with web2py and asked a question, Massimo will likely answer it. But the perceptual problem of web2py is a single-person effort is real. Massimo fixes most of the bugs (it seems so). Massimo is mainly responsible for PR. Massimo is in charge of experts4solution (it appears so). Massimo is mainly in charge of documentation (the book) (it appears so). Note that these are not necessary bad things. But the concern is real. Now, you can say this issue should not be a concern (i.e. we are okay with the current setup). Then that's a different perspective, a different story. Offhand, I can think of at least three major projects that have a single person in charge, in one way or another: Linux, OpenBSD and Python. I don't know much about the OpenBSD and Python patch processes, but all Linux patches go through Linus. So in that sense, Massimo's role is not unprecedented.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Then maybe a bit of info around massimo being the BDFL (python/linux, benevolent dictator for life) being out there might work. As said before, seems very much like a perception problem rather than something that will be solved via some sort of company or group running things rather than a single person. The current setup works great for me, but identifying that there are a few people (the list above is awesome) who are web2py experts, and very experienced in the code, even if there is a BDFL who is gatekeeper, and setting that as the expectation/perception going forward might well fix perception without any changes neccesary. Perhaps an about the developers page or something? Or an explanation of some sort on the web2py site? On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Jonathan Lundell jlund...@pobox.comwrote: On Dec 28, 2010, at 11:54 AM, VP wrote: I love the fact that if I have a problem with web2py and asked a question, Massimo will likely answer it. But the perceptual problem of web2py is a single-person effort is real. Massimo fixes most of the bugs (it seems so). Massimo is mainly responsible for PR. Massimo is in charge of experts4solution (it appears so). Massimo is mainly in charge of documentation (the book) (it appears so). Note that these are not necessary bad things. But the concern is real. Now, you can say this issue should not be a concern (i.e. we are okay with the current setup). Then that's a different perspective, a different story. Offhand, I can think of at least three major projects that have a single person in charge, in one way or another: Linux, OpenBSD and Python. I don't know much about the OpenBSD and Python patch processes, but all Linux patches go through Linus. So in that sense, Massimo's role is not unprecedented.
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Then maybe a bit of info around massimo being the BDFL (python/linux, benevolent dictator for life) being out there might work. As said before, seems very much like a perception problem rather than something that will be solved via some sort of company or group running things rather than a single person. I am going to clarify my opinion, not to be argumentative but in hope that it can be helpful. I do not think that it's a perception problem. I think the concern that web2py being a one-man show is very real. You can't deny the fact that Massimo is at the forefront of every facet of web2py (PR, documentation, coding, user interaction, etc.) Now, we have to be thankful to Massimo for all of the energy and passion put into this. And maybe, without other people filling in the roles, he'll have to do it. But one can't deny the fact that this is very real. Linux, Python, ... don't have this problem. Linus' role, I think, is quite minimal (but important). But we shouldn't talk about and implicitly compare web2py to these big projects as it's not fair. The point is like you put every software, databases, etc. of your company into one big, powerful, reliable server. Yes, there's an advantage. But it's also a valid source of concern: one server. Personally, I, and I think many people here, don't have problem with this set up. But I think big companies justifiably do. I would like to see web2py becomes matured in a similar model as Drupal, at lease with a PR manager, a release manager, a documentation manager, and a newbie-assistance manager, together with a platform that attracts developers and encourages contribution. Massimo's role should be in developing and setting visions. This is what Dries (Drupal's founder) does. He gives visions for upcoming versions of Drupal. And this is really something that attracts the big guys from the industry. Imagine Massimo declares, for example, web2py 2.x will heavily support on mobile computing, cloud computing, etc. Then, I'll predict that people, developers and companies with vested interests in these areas will jump in. In summary, the big guys care about not just where things are now, but also where things will be. They care about not being left in the cold, if Massimo decides to move to Hawaii and retires early. They care about where web2py is moving to.
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
While it is not required due to the nature of his position, I do hereby officially recognize Massimo Di Pierro as Web2py's Benevolent Dictator for Life as is in keeping with the Pythonic and opensource tradition and in recognition of his leadership and nurturing role in the development and maintenance of the Web2py project. Long Live Massimo! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_Dictator_For_Life On Dec 28, 4:02 pm, Tim Alexander dragonfyr...@gmail.com wrote: Then maybe a bit of info around massimo being the BDFL (python/linux, benevolent dictator for life) being out there might work. As said before, seems very much like a perception problem rather than something that will be solved via some sort of company or group running things rather than a single person. The current setup works great for me, but identifying that there are a few people (the list above is awesome) who are web2py experts, and very experienced in the code, even if there is a BDFL who is gatekeeper, and setting that as the expectation/perception going forward might well fix perception without any changes neccesary. Perhaps an about the developers page or something? Or an explanation of some sort on the web2py site? On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Jonathan Lundell jlund...@pobox.comwrote: On Dec 28, 2010, at 11:54 AM, VP wrote: I love the fact that if I have a problem with web2py and asked a question, Massimo will likely answer it. But the perceptual problem of web2py is a single-person effort is real. Massimo fixes most of the bugs (it seems so). Massimo is mainly responsible for PR. Massimo is in charge of experts4solution (it appears so). Massimo is mainly in charge of documentation (the book) (it appears so). Note that these are not necessary bad things. But the concern is real. Now, you can say this issue should not be a concern (i.e. we are okay with the current setup). Then that's a different perspective, a different story. Offhand, I can think of at least three major projects that have a single person in charge, in one way or another: Linux, OpenBSD and Python. I don't know much about the OpenBSD and Python patch processes, but all Linux patches go through Linus. So in that sense, Massimo's role is not unprecedented.
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
benevolent? On Dec 28, 4:01 pm, Christopher Steel chris.st...@gmail.com wrote: While it is not required due to the nature of his position, I do hereby officially recognize Massimo Di Pierro as Web2py's Benevolent Dictator for Life as is in keeping with the Pythonic and opensource tradition and in recognition of his leadership and nurturing role in the development and maintenance of the Web2py project. Long Live Massimo! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_Dictator_For_Life On Dec 28, 4:02 pm, Tim Alexander dragonfyr...@gmail.com wrote: Then maybe a bit of info around massimo being the BDFL (python/linux, benevolent dictator for life) being out there might work. As said before, seems very much like a perception problem rather than something that will be solved via some sort of company or group running things rather than a single person. The current setup works great for me, but identifying that there are a few people (the list above is awesome) who are web2py experts, and very experienced in the code, even if there is a BDFL who is gatekeeper, and setting that as the expectation/perception going forward might well fix perception without any changes neccesary. Perhaps an about the developers page or something? Or an explanation of some sort on the web2py site? On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Jonathan Lundell jlund...@pobox.comwrote: On Dec 28, 2010, at 11:54 AM, VP wrote: I love the fact that if I have a problem with web2py and asked a question, Massimo will likely answer it. But the perceptual problem of web2py is a single-person effort is real. Massimo fixes most of the bugs (it seems so). Massimo is mainly responsible for PR. Massimo is in charge of experts4solution (it appears so). Massimo is mainly in charge of documentation (the book) (it appears so). Note that these are not necessary bad things. But the concern is real. Now, you can say this issue should not be a concern (i.e. we are okay with the current setup). Then that's a different perspective, a different story. Offhand, I can think of at least three major projects that have a single person in charge, in one way or another: Linux, OpenBSD and Python. I don't know much about the OpenBSD and Python patch processes, but all Linux patches go through Linus. So in that sense, Massimo's role is not unprecedented.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Something like that. We could go with semi tolerant dictator for life... :) On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 4:21 PM, mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: benevolent? On Dec 28, 4:01 pm, Christopher Steel chris.st...@gmail.com wrote: While it is not required due to the nature of his position, I do hereby officially recognize Massimo Di Pierro as Web2py's Benevolent Dictator for Life as is in keeping with the Pythonic and opensource tradition and in recognition of his leadership and nurturing role in the development and maintenance of the Web2py project. Long Live Massimo! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_Dictator_For_Life On Dec 28, 4:02 pm, Tim Alexander dragonfyr...@gmail.com wrote: Then maybe a bit of info around massimo being the BDFL (python/linux, benevolent dictator for life) being out there might work. As said before, seems very much like a perception problem rather than something that will be solved via some sort of company or group running things rather than a single person. The current setup works great for me, but identifying that there are a few people (the list above is awesome) who are web2py experts, and very experienced in the code, even if there is a BDFL who is gatekeeper, and setting that as the expectation/perception going forward might well fix perception without any changes neccesary. Perhaps an about the developers page or something? Or an explanation of some sort on the web2py site? On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Jonathan Lundell jlund...@pobox.com wrote: On Dec 28, 2010, at 11:54 AM, VP wrote: I love the fact that if I have a problem with web2py and asked a question, Massimo will likely answer it. But the perceptual problem of web2py is a single-person effort is real. Massimo fixes most of the bugs (it seems so). Massimo is mainly responsible for PR. Massimo is in charge of experts4solution (it appears so). Massimo is mainly in charge of documentation (the book) (it appears so). Note that these are not necessary bad things. But the concern is real. Now, you can say this issue should not be a concern (i.e. we are okay with the current setup). Then that's a different perspective, a different story. Offhand, I can think of at least three major projects that have a single person in charge, in one way or another: Linux, OpenBSD and Python. I don't know much about the OpenBSD and Python patch processes, but all Linux patches go through Linus. So in that sense, Massimo's role is not unprecedented.
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 11:21 PM, mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: benevolent? What? Prefer malevolent? :) -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Wow, some heavy duty concerns in this thread... I'm not fully versed in the detailed legalities of those things, but I'll elaborate things as I understand them and perhaps I can be corrected if I'm wrong... Basically, I get Web2py under the GLP licence. Under that licence, I can: 1) Use and distribute the unmodified web framework indefinitely as long as I provide a copy of the licence and the source code 2) Modify the source code of the Framework as I see fit as long as long as I make an open source copy of my modification available with an original copy of the licence and indicate how it was modified from the original source The above would apply to any copy I downloaded when the licence was in force, even if say, Massimo was struck by a meteor and Web2py stopped being distributed under such a licence. So, the main worry isn't that if Massimo is eaten by raiding cannibals, people won't have the legal means to distribute future modified copies of Web2py, but rather that nobody may have the expertize or interest to do so, correct? On Dec 28, 12:28 pm, mdipierro mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: Afoundationis a corporation and, believe it or not, in US a corporation is a person: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/01/the... The Djangofoundationwas created two years ago (and Django is 4-5 years older thanweb2py). Do you have any evidence that it has improved its popularity: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? Python has afoundationand it looks to me it is always broke. I just spoke with a recruiter that was looking for Python programmers for a big US bank and I complained that his client relied on a product (Python) and did not make any donation to support it. The python developers are not supported by thefoundation, as far as I know. Afoundationhas costs higher than a corporation and I do not get enough donation to cover those costs. A corporation (experts4solutions) is cheaper (it still costs at least $500/year of my own money). Moreover afoundationimplies that design decision are taken by committee and I do not believe in that. I consult with core developers and users on important matters but I think there has to be one individual who ultimately takes decisions about the direction of the project. We have explored the possibility of joining the free software conservatory but we got no feedback. Rails is owned by a corporation (37signals) which is owned by one individual. It seems to be the model works well for them. In my case I decided not to pass copyright and trademark to experts4solutions because I thought some would have criticized it. I am not the only committer to the mainweb2pybranch. Jonathan L. is also a committer and will use his power in case I am incapacitated. Yet, that should not be a crowded space in order to avoid internal conflicts. I will write a will that explains what happens to theweb2pytrademark and copyright in case I die. Massimo On Dec 28, 2:12 am, Graham Dumpleton graham.dumple...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or afoundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation orfoundationand copyright still held by the continuing entity. In your case, if you get hit by a bus driven by a disgruntled Python developer, then no one else can simply take over the software as it is now, using any existing legal structure etc. Instead it would as you say need to be forked and in being forked legally may even need to change names as a result if you have sole rights over the original name. So, your own words support the contention expressed by some that it is 'single person framework' as far as ownership and control is concerned, an issue which is distinct from whether or not you have other contributors. Graham The purpose of thefoundationis to collect money for development and advertising. Other organization like Rails have chose to create a company instead of afoundation. We have created a company (experts4solutions.com) whose purpose is to promote skilledweb2pyprofessionals (and you can joins), foster web2pyprojects, sell consulting and long term support contracts. This was advertised here a few months ago. Some users have joined. Massimo On Dec 27, 9:46 pm, Pepe Araya pepe...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, some news about this topic? I think 2 things are going in favor of creating
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Wednesday, December 29, 2010 5:49:17 PM UTC+11, Magnitus wrote: Wow, some heavy duty concerns in this thread... I'm not fully versed in the detailed legalities of those things, but I'll elaborate things as I understand them and perhaps I can be corrected if I'm wrong... Basically, I get Web2py under the GLP licence. Under that licence, I can: 1) Use and distribute the unmodified web framework indefinitely as long as I provide a copy of the licence and the source code 2) Modify the source code of the Framework as I see fit as long as long as I make an open source copy of my modification available with an original copy of the licence and indicate how it was modified from the original source The above would apply to any copy I downloaded when the licence was in force, even if say, Massimo was struck by a meteor and Web2py stopped being distributed under such a licence. So, the main worry isn't that if Massimo is eaten by raiding cannibals, people won't have the legal means to distribute future modified copies of Web2py, but rather that nobody may have the expertize or interest to do so, correct? It is an open question whether distribution of such modified copies are legally allowed to still be called web2py if Massimo has sole legal rights on the name. Thus, you may be able to do that, but you likely would have to call it something other than web2py. Graham On Dec 28, 12:28 pm, mdipierro mdip...@cs.depaul.edu wrote: Afoundationis a corporation and, believe it or not, in US a corporation is a person: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/01/the... The Djangofoundationwas created two years ago (and Django is 4-5 years older thanweb2py). Do you have any evidence that it has improved its popularity: http://www.google.com/trends?q=django? Python has afoundationand it looks to me it is always broke. I just spoke with a recruiter that was looking for Python programmers for a big US bank and I complained that his client relied on a product (Python) and did not make any donation to support it. The python developers are not supported by thefoundation, as far as I know. Afoundationhas costs higher than a corporation and I do not get enough donation to cover those costs. A corporation (experts4solutions) is cheaper (it still costs at least $500/year of my own money). Moreover afoundationimplies that design decision are taken by committee and I do not believe in that. I consult with core developers and users on important matters but I think there has to be one individual who ultimately takes decisions about the direction of the project. We have explored the possibility of joining the free software conservatory but we got no feedback. Rails is owned by a corporation (37signals) which is owned by one individual. It seems to be the model works well for them. In my case I decided not to pass copyright and trademark to experts4solutions because I thought some would have criticized it. I am not the only committer to the mainweb2pybranch. Jonathan L. is also a committer and will use his power in case I am incapacitated. Yet, that should not be a crowded space in order to avoid internal conflicts. I will write a will that explains what happens to theweb2pytrademark and copyright in case I die. Massimo On Dec 28, 2:12 am, Graham Dumpleton graham.d...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:37:30 PM UTC+11, mdipierro wrote: Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. That last line actually supports the idea that a piece of software is owned and controlled by a single person. If a piece of software was owned by a group, be it a corporation or afoundation, the death of the core developer would make no difference as it would continue to be developed within the structure of that corporation orfoundationand copyright still held by the continuing entity. In your case, if you get hit by a bus driven by a disgruntled Python developer, then no one else can simply take over the software as it is now, using any existing legal structure etc. Instead it would as you say need to be forked and in being forked legally may even need to change names as a result if you have sole rights over the original name. So, your own words support the contention expressed by some that it is 'single person framework' as far as ownership and control is concerned, an issue which is distinct from whether or not you have other contributors. Graham The purpose of thefoundationis to collect money for
Re: [web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
It is an open question whether distribution of such modified copies are legally allowed to still be called web2py if Massimo has sole legal rights on the name. Thus, you may be able to do that, but you likely would have to call it something other than web2py. Well, uneless dead people can sue you in court, it's probably as legal as written permission. -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Hi, some news about this topic? I think 2 things are going in favor of creating a foundation or [whatever]: 1. the community has grown a lot. 2. in all the reviews I read about web2py, always, always, ALWAYS!!! say it is a single-person framework and that takes away the future security of their development. kind regards Pepe
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
On Dec 27, 8:46 pm, Pepe Araya pepea...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, some news about this topic? I think 2 things are going in favor of creating a foundation or [whatever]: 1. the community has grown a lot. 2. in all the reviews I read about web2py, always, always, ALWAYS!!! say it is a single-person framework and that takes away the future security of their development. I strongly agree with the last point. I think the recent license change is good but making web2py community frame work would help. This is honestly the biggest fear I have in using web2py in my upcoming project as allowed to django which I like less but I am more confidant in it's continued development. This is my perception of this right or wrong. Vincent kind regards Pepe
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Non-for-profits take a lot to setup and administer ... more so than corporations. I've set up all different types of corps: Schedule S, Schedule C, LLCs, but never a 501c3 (non-profit). I have 2 family members who have extensive experience setting up and administering 501c3's and from talking with them about it over the years, it's much more work to administer than any other type of corp. Nevertheless, as comments in this thread point out, there is a body of users who will not consider web2py unless it has some sort of foundation status/ ownership. I'm not an attorney, so take what I say with a heavy dose of salt -- I think it's OK to discuss not-for-profit status at this time, but probably too early to execute on going all the way. I say that because I think web2py functionality is still where the bulk of effort should go. We're still in the early-adopter stage of web2py, and the people you're going to lose by not being a 501c3 are probably in the early- or late-majority category. Demonstrating an intention to move in this direction is probably good enough for the early adopters and maybe some early majority types. I know that under the current structure, I'm not the least bit concerned about moving my apps to web2py. But then again, I have full control and don't report to a pointy-haired boss somewhere who has a herd mentality.
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Not sure what a single person framework means. This framework counts almost 100 contributors and at least 50 people very skilled here. If I get hit by a track any of them can take over by forking my branch as allowed by the license. The purpose of the foundation is to collect money for development and advertising. Other organization like Rails have chose to create a company instead of a foundation. We have created a company (experts4solutions.com) whose purpose is to promote skilled web2py professionals (and you can joins), foster web2py projects, sell consulting and long term support contracts. This was advertised here a few months ago. Some users have joined. Massimo On Dec 27, 9:46 pm, Pepe Araya pepea...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, some news about this topic? I think 2 things are going in favor of creating a foundation or [whatever]: 1. the community has grown a lot. 2. in all the reviews I read about web2py, always, always, ALWAYS!!! say it is a single-person framework and that takes away the future security of their development. kind regards Pepe
[web2py] Re: Web2Py Foundation?
Sorry, I only did a question, not a claim... I know this community and framework and I know that there are a lot of people collaborating. I mentioned the single-person phrase beacause is what I always read in the reviews about web2py vs others frameworks. It's not what I think. Now, I have something to answer: hey guys, what about experts4solutions.com? that's a whole company working with/for web2py!!! :) that sounds good! Maybe more presence of experts4solutions.com would be good... Kind regards! Pepe
