Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
Bill, i shared my 2 cents as am on the jakarta pmc :) -- dims On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 16:20:33 -0800, Bill Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Jim Jagielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 3:01 PM > Subject: Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change > > > Henri Yandell wrote: > >> > >> > >> It may be that leading contributor is, while not an 'Apache Way' to > >> discuss something, a completely true piece of investigative journalism. > >> There are definitely parts of Commons where a little bit of investigation > >> could point out that "Yes, on DBUtils 1.0, David Graham was the lead > >> developer" (Sorry David :) ). > >> > > > > That may be true, but certainly we do have the right and responsibility > > to ensure that our desires, as far as how we run and represent ourselves, > > is accurate as well. > > > > It has always been a major foundation of the ASF that projects > > are built and developed by communities, not individuals. > > Terms such as "lead" or "main" do cause harm to the community > > and have always been actively avoided. > > > > And, yet, all of the complaints about the article have been from people that > aren't involved with Tomcat development ;-). > > > -- > > === > > Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ > >"There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else." > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as > the intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and > CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, > or distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this > communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then > delete all copies of this message and any attachments. > > In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent > through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive > information, such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal > identification numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Costin Manolache wrote: It's never bad to clarify things. Really? My wife tells me I do it all the time and need to learn to shut up :) For example ( honestly ! ) it's the first time I hear that the name of the project is "Apache Tomcat". Someone should send a mail to tomcat-dev to inform them, the tomcat site is under the impression that it's called "Apache Jakarta Tomcat" - and almost all docs and packages and books are 'jakarta-tomcat'. I believe it went through on the PMC list a fair while back, which definitely has a good number of the tomcat-dev committers on it. It was on the pmc list, subject was 'protection of trademarks'. Bill and Yoav were involved in the long thread, in which consensus appeared to exist on Apache Tomcat. If nothing else, it's good that we've managed to have this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] rather than [EMAIL PROTECTED] :) I'm +1 on your email if you are going to send the same kind of email for every use of "Tomcat" and if we are going to send an email every time a company or individual claims he is making 'lead contributions' to an apache project. And I would feel much better if such rules would be written down ( so we can point people to it - and use them in all cases). I think we should be sending such emails, especially if there's a chance of changing the print article. Also we need to be much more organized internally as to what the views are on all of this. I'm -1 if this is only about Jboss, it's just not fair. It may have made it more obvious, but I think the same unhappiness would have happened if it had been anyone unless they had originally contributed the codebase. I doubt we'd see huge complaints about articles discussing 'IBM/Apache's Derby', or, N years ago, Sun/Apache's Tomcat. Nowadays I'd expect complaints if someone tried to describe it as Sun/Apache's Tomcat. If tomcat would be a top level project instead of jakarta-tomcat, most likely Remy would be the PMC chair. Acording to ASF rules, the PMC chair is the ultimate decision maker for a project. Yep, though I can say that from experience that it just increases the worry of being wrong :) It seems the notion of 'project leads' is not accepted by some - yet the entire legal organisation of apache is based on a top-down hieararhy ( Board -> PMC chair ). I don't know what is worse - the perception people have about things, or the reality. Similar to the Codehaus despot argument. Many of our communities are driven by one or two people, but the way we perceive them helps those communities survive the loss of a lead. I half suspect that it is the blind-eye to the reality of leads that makes it easy for others to step up and become leads. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
It's never bad to clarify things. For example ( honestly ! ) it's the first time I hear that the name of the project is "Apache Tomcat". Someone should send a mail to tomcat-dev to inform them, the tomcat site is under the impression that it's called "Apache Jakarta Tomcat" - and almost all docs and packages and books are 'jakarta-tomcat'. I'm +1 on your email if you are going to send the same kind of email for every use of "Tomcat" and if we are going to send an email every time a company or individual claims he is making 'lead contributions' to an apache project. And I would feel much better if such rules would be written down ( so we can point people to it - and use them in all cases). I'm -1 if this is only about Jboss, it's just not fair. If tomcat would be a top level project instead of jakarta-tomcat, most likely Remy would be the PMC chair. Acording to ASF rules, the PMC chair is the ultimate decision maker for a project. It seems the notion of 'project leads' is not accepted by some - yet the entire legal organisation of apache is based on a top-down hieararhy ( Board -> PMC chair ). I don't know what is worse - the perception people have about things, or the reality. Costin Henri Yandell wrote: On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Bill Barker wrote: - Original Message - From: "Jim Jagielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 3:01 PM Subject: Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change Henri Yandell wrote: It may be that leading contributor is, while not an 'Apache Way' to discuss something, a completely true piece of investigative journalism. There are definitely parts of Commons where a little bit of investigation could point out that "Yes, on DBUtils 1.0, David Graham was the lead developer" (Sorry David :) ). That may be true, but certainly we do have the right and responsibility to ensure that our desires, as far as how we run and represent ourselves, is accurate as well. It has always been a major foundation of the ASF that projects are built and developed by communities, not individuals. Terms such as "lead" or "main" do cause harm to the community and have always been actively avoided. And, yet, all of the complaints about the article have been from people that aren't involved with Tomcat development ;-). Yeah I've noticed. So far we have Costin, Mladen, Remy and yourself all fairly nonplussed by it all. Nothing from Yoav yet. Unsure who else is highly active in Tomcat at the moment. Obvious quandry for me, we don't really have any concept of subcommunity, apart from the individual dev lists, it's supposed to be the Jakarta community at large and apart from Tim who feels that we should focus on the Tomcat and JBoss sites and not SD's release, that community is in favour. I'm trying to walk the line here :) I do think the 'leading' is wrong, and it's worth the ASF doing its best to sell its philosophy of community developed software. All the suggestions to soften my email are very well received, I was trying for informal but failed (I'm trained to only use small talk when holding a beer). However, unless the Tomcat developers want to -1 the email, the consensus is to send it out (with a few minor, suggested changes). A quick show of hands on tomcat-dev to the idea of sending a -1 to the general@ list might be simpler than sending various -1s and -0s to the list individually. I'll put back the estimated send-time until tomorrow night (28 hours from now basically). Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
> > And, yet, all of the complaints about the article have been > > from people that aren't involved with Tomcat development ;-). > Obvious quandry for me, we don't really have any concept of subcommunity, > apart from the individual dev lists, it's supposed to be the Jakarta > community at large Remind me again ... why isn't Tomcat a TLP? --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Bill Barker wrote: - Original Message - From: "Jim Jagielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 3:01 PM Subject: Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change Henri Yandell wrote: It may be that leading contributor is, while not an 'Apache Way' to discuss something, a completely true piece of investigative journalism. There are definitely parts of Commons where a little bit of investigation could point out that "Yes, on DBUtils 1.0, David Graham was the lead developer" (Sorry David :) ). That may be true, but certainly we do have the right and responsibility to ensure that our desires, as far as how we run and represent ourselves, is accurate as well. It has always been a major foundation of the ASF that projects are built and developed by communities, not individuals. Terms such as "lead" or "main" do cause harm to the community and have always been actively avoided. And, yet, all of the complaints about the article have been from people that aren't involved with Tomcat development ;-). Yeah I've noticed. So far we have Costin, Mladen, Remy and yourself all fairly nonplussed by it all. Nothing from Yoav yet. Unsure who else is highly active in Tomcat at the moment. Obvious quandry for me, we don't really have any concept of subcommunity, apart from the individual dev lists, it's supposed to be the Jakarta community at large and apart from Tim who feels that we should focus on the Tomcat and JBoss sites and not SD's release, that community is in favour. I'm trying to walk the line here :) I do think the 'leading' is wrong, and it's worth the ASF doing its best to sell its philosophy of community developed software. All the suggestions to soften my email are very well received, I was trying for informal but failed (I'm trained to only use small talk when holding a beer). However, unless the Tomcat developers want to -1 the email, the consensus is to send it out (with a few minor, suggested changes). A quick show of hands on tomcat-dev to the idea of sending a -1 to the general@ list might be simpler than sending various -1s and -0s to the list individually. I'll put back the estimated send-time until tomorrow night (28 hours from now basically). Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
- Original Message - From: "Jim Jagielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 3:01 PM Subject: Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change Henri Yandell wrote: It may be that leading contributor is, while not an 'Apache Way' to discuss something, a completely true piece of investigative journalism. There are definitely parts of Commons where a little bit of investigation could point out that "Yes, on DBUtils 1.0, David Graham was the lead developer" (Sorry David :) ). That may be true, but certainly we do have the right and responsibility to ensure that our desires, as far as how we run and represent ourselves, is accurate as well. It has always been a major foundation of the ASF that projects are built and developed by communities, not individuals. Terms such as "lead" or "main" do cause harm to the community and have always been actively avoided. And, yet, all of the complaints about the article have been from people that aren't involved with Tomcat development ;-). -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else." - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of this message and any attachments. In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Jim Jagielski wrote: Tim O'Brien wrote: Henri, I'm not -1, you can send it if you want. You are (after all) Jakarta. :-)=20 Of course, that's just as wrong as the concept of Leading Contributor or Main Developer :) To give Tim context, it's a joke referring to a private conversation we had based on the board's explanation that the chair is the only legal entity in the project (it was somewhere in the Avalon threads on committers I think). I think it was Greg. To give that explanation better context, it pointed out that a chair who was considered to be despotic was unlikely to be a chair for long, legal entity or not. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
Remy Maucherat wrote: > > I am definitely contributing to Tomcat as part of my employment at > JBoss. I am not contributing on my own free time to Tomcat as an > individual at the moment, and (as far as I can remember, as it was a > while ago ...) have submitted a company CLA reflecting that > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas). Anyway, it is obvious Apache has > the notion of company contributions. Stating otherwise is wrong, and > does not match the legal documents the ASF uses. > > I think continuing with the current attitude would only lead my company > to reevaluate its involvement in ASF projects, and I could not really > blame them if they did. Of course, this may be what some people here > seek (hopefully, it is not and it's just my paranoia at work). > Personally, having JBoss or any company reevaluate their involvement in any ASF project would be a damn shame, and is something that I would not want at all (assuming the reevaluation resulted in them dropping their involvement! :) ). Quite a few of us, myself included, are paid by our companies to develop and donate any code/patches/fixes we develop back into the ASF code. Of course, there are no guarantees regarding that... Just because I or Covalent want something in HTTPD or APR or whatever doesn't mean it's going in. But that's beside the point. When we touch ASF code, we do it with our ASF hats on, even if it was developed with our INSERT-COMPANY-NAME-HERE hats on. We, as individuals, have commit access. We, as individuals, are granted contributor/committer/member status. When we commit code, we do so as those individuals, with our ASF hats on. Those companies who pay our salaries deserve credit, no doubt. Just as we personally benefit with our involvement in ASF projects, so do the companies we work for, whether they are huge F100 companies, or small 1-man consulting firms. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else." - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
Tim O'Brien wrote: > > Henri, I'm not -1, you can send it if you want. You are (after all) > Jakarta. :-)=20 > Of course, that's just as wrong as the concept of Leading Contributor or Main Developer :) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else." - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft-2] SD Magazine: request for change
On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 20:40 +0100, Torsten Curdt wrote: > > Hi Kate, > > > > I'd like to thank SD/Jolt on behalf of the Jakarta community for the > > JOLT "Productivity Winner" award for Tomcat 5.0. Media recognition of > > the work the Tomcat community puts in is always very welcome. > > > > I'm also writing to let you know about a [serious] error on your JOLT > > product excellence awards press release because I am concerned it might > > be reproduced in your forthcoming June 2005 issue: > > I would drop "serious" +1 > > http://www.sdmagazine.com/pressroom/jolt_winners_2005.pdf > > > > The release [incorrectly] attributes Apache's Tomcat 5.0 product to "The > > Also the "incorrectly" +1 > > Apache Jakarta Project and leading Tomcat contributor JBoss". > > > > There is one big problem with this attribution for us, Apache does not > > have a concept of leading contributors. It is completely out of sync > > with the very philosophies that lie at the heart of the Apache Software > > Foundation (ASF), as there are 70 committers to the Tomcat codebase, > > many of whom are employed by other companies or contribute individually. > > > > We would like to request that this be changed to: > > "request" sounds a bit harsh ...what about "see" +1 > > "Tomcat 5.0 (The Apache Software Foundation)" > > > > in both the press release (pdf url above) and the forthcoming June 2005 > > issue. > > > > Officially the name of the product is "Apache Tomcat 5.0" and not just > > "Tomcat 5.0", but I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you'd > > like to prefix Tomcat with Apache or not, as the subsequent mention of > > the ASF is fine. > > ...always play nice on the first contact. +1 sometimes less says more :) am i right in thinking that the importance of pushing "Apache Tomcat" now is about trademark issues? (one neat way of diffusing this the whole issue might be for the attribution to be corrected but a quote given by remy of jboss) - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
Henri Yandell wrote: > > > It may be that leading contributor is, while not an 'Apache Way' to > discuss something, a completely true piece of investigative journalism. > There are definitely parts of Commons where a little bit of investigation > could point out that "Yes, on DBUtils 1.0, David Graham was the lead > developer" (Sorry David :) ). > That may be true, but certainly we do have the right and responsibility to ensure that our desires, as far as how we run and represent ourselves, is accurate as well. It has always been a major foundation of the ASF that projects are built and developed by communities, not individuals. Terms such as "lead" or "main" do cause harm to the community and have always been actively avoided. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else." - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft-2] SD Magazine: request for change
I think this is great. More inline... On Mar 20, 2005, at 1:19 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: Added thanks for the award. Removed the text about companies not being contributors as it is nitpicking. Added note about Apache Tomcat, though I left it open to their discretion to avoid detracting from the main issue, that of the concept of a leading contributor. Hen === To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Tomcat 5.0 error in JOLT announcement Hi Kate, I'd like to thank SD/Jolt on behalf of the Jakarta community for the JOLT "Productivity Winner" award for Tomcat 5.0. Media recognition of the work the Tomcat community puts in is always very welcome. I'm also writing to let you know about a serious error on your JOLT product excellence awards press release because I am concerned it might be reproduced in your forthcoming June 2005 issue: http://www.sdmagazine.com/pressroom/jolt_winners_2005.pdf The release incorrectly attributes Apache's Tomcat 5.0 product to "The Apache Jakarta Project and leading Tomcat contributor JBoss". There is one big problem with this attribution for us, Apache does not have a concept of leading contributors. It is completely out of sync with the very philosophies that lie at the heart of the Apache Software Foundation (ASF), as there are 70 committers to the Tomcat codebase, many of whom are employed by other companies or contribute individually. We would like to request that this be changed to: "Tomcat 5.0 (The Apache Software Foundation)" in both the press release (pdf url above) and the forthcoming June 2005 issue. Officially the name of the product is "Apache Tomcat 5.0" and not just "Tomcat 5.0", but I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you'd like to prefix Tomcat with Apache or not, as the subsequent mention of the ASF is fine. I'd actually gently push as we want this to be named "Apache Tomcat 5.0". "Officially, the name of the project is "Apache Tomcat 5.0", and not just "Tomcat 5.0", and we'd appreciate the change if that was possible." :) Well done! geir Many thanks, Henri Yandell V.P., Apache Jakarta Aw, spell this out. You want this to be as impressive as it can be for this : Henri Yandell Vice President, Apache Jakarta Project The Apache Software Foundation :) geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft-2] SD Magazine: request for change
While not directly involved with Tomcat, some code I have written via commons probably is included in Tomcat distros. My comment is simply that I found the pdf description rather distasteful and definitely worthy of gentle correction. We all have lines that we don't want to see crossed, and each person has a line in a different place. Simply put, this crossed my line. +1 to sending the mail Stephen - Original Message - From: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Added thanks for the award. Removed the text about companies not being contributors as it is nitpicking. Added note about Apache Tomcat, though I left it open to their discretion to avoid detracting from the main issue, that of the concept of a leading contributor. Hen === To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Tomcat 5.0 error in JOLT announcement Hi Kate, I'd like to thank SD/Jolt on behalf of the Jakarta community for the JOLT "Productivity Winner" award for Tomcat 5.0. Media recognition of the work the Tomcat community puts in is always very welcome. I'm also writing to let you know about a serious error on your JOLT product excellence awards press release because I am concerned it might be reproduced in your forthcoming June 2005 issue: http://www.sdmagazine.com/pressroom/jolt_winners_2005.pdf The release incorrectly attributes Apache's Tomcat 5.0 product to "The Apache Jakarta Project and leading Tomcat contributor JBoss". There is one big problem with this attribution for us, Apache does not have a concept of leading contributors. It is completely out of sync with the very philosophies that lie at the heart of the Apache Software Foundation (ASF), as there are 70 committers to the Tomcat codebase, many of whom are employed by other companies or contribute individually. We would like to request that this be changed to: "Tomcat 5.0 (The Apache Software Foundation)" in both the press release (pdf url above) and the forthcoming June 2005 issue. Officially the name of the product is "Apache Tomcat 5.0" and not just "Tomcat 5.0", but I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you'd like to prefix Tomcat with Apache or not, as the subsequent mention of the ASF is fine. Many thanks, Henri Yandell V.P., Apache Jakarta - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
I think one of the great things about the ASF is that it does allow commercial involvement in their projects. I'd love us to figure out how we ARE comfortable thanking JBoss, IBM, etc.. rather than only reacting when we feel a line is crossed. Amen! (said as a commiter involved in a commercial enterprise that both makes me highly thankful for Apache/Jakarta, and also motivates my participation in the community) As an aside, nice job, Henri in facilitating a quick but inclusive discussion of a potentially emotional charged issue. WILL - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: it is obvious Apache has the notion of company contributions. Companies authorize individuals where their employment agreement might be in conflict with a CLA, and companies can provide a Software Grant in the case where the existing IP is owned by the company. This applies equally to IBM, Sun, BEA, Gluecode, DevTech, or JBoss. This is an accurate legal description but not really an issue to me. Clarifying the IP flow of company -> committer -> ASF would suggest that we would be ok to say "Tomcat by Apache and lead contributor JBoss via Remy." None of this is new. It has been discussed at length, and is fairly well established. This is a legal distinction having nothing to do with the promotional wording of the Jolt awards. Big +1 to Jolt needing a correction. I don't quite know how to feel JBoss's desire to promote their contributions to the ASF. I'm guessing IBM, Sun, and BEA contribute more to the ASF than JBoss does, but these larger contributions come from companies that do not have a strategic goal of marketing themselves as open source leaders. I think one of the great things about the ASF is that it does allow commercial involvement in their projects. I'd love us to figure out how we ARE comfortable thanking JBoss, IBM, etc.. rather than only reacting when we feel a line is crossed. -- Serge Knystautas Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
Davanum Srinivas wrote: Rémy, You will probably need to resend the CCLA...i can't find in the regular location where ccla's are recorded. - Can u please explain what you mean by "current attitude"? It's already 'explained' in various mailing list archives, including this thread :-) - Are u saying that Tomcat is *NOT* really "Apache Tomcat"? I thought it's "Jakarta Tomcat" :-) I checked the web site - it says 'Apache Jakarta Tomcat' - but most of the docs and packages are jakarta-tomcat or just tomcat. There are quite a few books, articles and many sites out there using either 'tomcat' or 'jakarta tomcat' - should we ask for a change as well, or is it only for jboss ? - Are you saying that we need to formalize a mechanism to figure out which company is a leading contributor to a certain project? I would say each company and contributor is a 'leading contributor' :-), but it is true that some companies contribute more - Jboss and Sun in particular for tomcat ( at some point it was Sun and IBM ), and I think they deserve credit for spending money on this. Formally - each contributor has the same voting and veto rights in any project, and is free to 'lead' with his contributions. How people outside apache see the fact that few individuals contribute more is a different story. It happens in all projects - even httpd - that at some point 3-4 people are extremely active and contribute more than the average. Is it fair to say they 'drive the project' or are making 'leading contributions' ? That's the reality - may not be politically correct in apache culture ( we all know board/pmc/philosophy/oversight/abstract community are the 'leading contributors' in any project, not individuals :-) I've seen a lot of cases where people or companies have claimed a 'leading' role in various apache projects. This is the first time there is a rush to correct this. Is jboss a factor ? Costin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft-2] SD Magazine: request for change
Overall, it looks good to me. The reference in the first paragraph should probably be "Apache Tomcat". Thanks, Henri. Cheers, -g On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 01:19:14PM -0500, Henri Yandell wrote: > > Added thanks for the award. > > Removed the text about companies not being contributors as it is nitpicking. > > Added note about Apache Tomcat, though I left it open to their discretion > to avoid detracting from the main issue, that of the concept of a leading > contributor. > > Hen > > === > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Tomcat 5.0 error in JOLT announcement > > Hi Kate, > > I'd like to thank SD/Jolt on behalf of the Jakarta community for the JOLT > "Productivity Winner" award for Tomcat 5.0. Media recognition of the work > the Tomcat community puts in is always very welcome. > > I'm also writing to let you know about a serious error on your JOLT > product excellence awards press release because I am concerned it might be > reproduced in your forthcoming June 2005 issue: > > http://www.sdmagazine.com/pressroom/jolt_winners_2005.pdf > > The release incorrectly attributes Apache's Tomcat 5.0 product to "The > Apache Jakarta Project and leading Tomcat contributor JBoss". > > There is one big problem with this attribution for us, Apache does not > have a concept of leading contributors. It is completely out of sync with > the very philosophies that lie at the heart of the Apache Software > Foundation (ASF), as there are 70 committers to the Tomcat codebase, many > of whom are employed by other companies or contribute individually. > > We would like to request that this be changed to: > > "Tomcat 5.0 (The Apache Software Foundation)" > > in both the press release (pdf url above) and the forthcoming June 2005 > issue. > > Officially the name of the product is "Apache Tomcat 5.0" and not just > "Tomcat 5.0", but I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you'd > like to prefix Tomcat with Apache or not, as the subsequent mention of the > ASF is fine. > > Many thanks, > > Henri Yandell > V.P., Apache Jakarta -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... ASF Chairman ... http://www.apache.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft-2] SD Magazine: request for change
> Hi Kate, > > I'd like to thank SD/Jolt on behalf of the Jakarta community for the > JOLT "Productivity Winner" award for Tomcat 5.0. Media recognition of > the work the Tomcat community puts in is always very welcome. > > I'm also writing to let you know about a [serious] error on your JOLT > product excellence awards press release because I am concerned it might > be reproduced in your forthcoming June 2005 issue: I would drop "serious" > http://www.sdmagazine.com/pressroom/jolt_winners_2005.pdf > > The release [incorrectly] attributes Apache's Tomcat 5.0 product to "The Also the "incorrectly" > Apache Jakarta Project and leading Tomcat contributor JBoss". > > There is one big problem with this attribution for us, Apache does not > have a concept of leading contributors. It is completely out of sync > with the very philosophies that lie at the heart of the Apache Software > Foundation (ASF), as there are 70 committers to the Tomcat codebase, > many of whom are employed by other companies or contribute individually. > > We would like to request that this be changed to: "request" sounds a bit harsh ...what about "see" > "Tomcat 5.0 (The Apache Software Foundation)" > > in both the press release (pdf url above) and the forthcoming June 2005 > issue. > > Officially the name of the product is "Apache Tomcat 5.0" and not just > "Tomcat 5.0", but I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you'd > like to prefix Tomcat with Apache or not, as the subsequent mention of > the ASF is fine. ...always play nice on the first contact. My 2 cents cheers -- Torsten signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [draft-2] SD Magazine: request for change
Henri Yandell wrote: Specifically to Remy/Mladen, does this seem acceptable to you with your JBoss hats on? Personally I don't care. If those things bother you guys, do what ever you wish. Regards, Mladen. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[draft-2] SD Magazine: request for change
Added thanks for the award. Removed the text about companies not being contributors as it is nitpicking. Added note about Apache Tomcat, though I left it open to their discretion to avoid detracting from the main issue, that of the concept of a leading contributor. Hen === To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Tomcat 5.0 error in JOLT announcement Hi Kate, I'd like to thank SD/Jolt on behalf of the Jakarta community for the JOLT "Productivity Winner" award for Tomcat 5.0. Media recognition of the work the Tomcat community puts in is always very welcome. I'm also writing to let you know about a serious error on your JOLT product excellence awards press release because I am concerned it might be reproduced in your forthcoming June 2005 issue: http://www.sdmagazine.com/pressroom/jolt_winners_2005.pdf The release incorrectly attributes Apache's Tomcat 5.0 product to "The Apache Jakarta Project and leading Tomcat contributor JBoss". There is one big problem with this attribution for us, Apache does not have a concept of leading contributors. It is completely out of sync with the very philosophies that lie at the heart of the Apache Software Foundation (ASF), as there are 70 committers to the Tomcat codebase, many of whom are employed by other companies or contribute individually. We would like to request that this be changed to: "Tomcat 5.0 (The Apache Software Foundation)" in both the press release (pdf url above) and the forthcoming June 2005 issue. Officially the name of the product is "Apache Tomcat 5.0" and not just "Tomcat 5.0", but I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you'd like to prefix Tomcat with Apache or not, as the subsequent mention of the ASF is fine. Many thanks, Henri Yandell V.P., Apache Jakarta - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft-2] SD Magazine: request for change
Specifically to Remy/Mladen, does this seem acceptable to you with your JBoss hats on? Trying to focus on the email being a request to focus on the whole Tomcat community rather than just the two of you for the success of Tomcat 5.0. Hen On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Henri Yandell wrote: Added thanks for the award. Removed the text about companies not being contributors as it is nitpicking. Added note about Apache Tomcat, though I left it open to their discretion to avoid detracting from the main issue, that of the concept of a leading contributor. Hen === To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Tomcat 5.0 error in JOLT announcement Hi Kate, I'd like to thank SD/Jolt on behalf of the Jakarta community for the JOLT "Productivity Winner" award for Tomcat 5.0. Media recognition of the work the Tomcat community puts in is always very welcome. I'm also writing to let you know about a serious error on your JOLT product excellence awards press release because I am concerned it might be reproduced in your forthcoming June 2005 issue: http://www.sdmagazine.com/pressroom/jolt_winners_2005.pdf The release incorrectly attributes Apache's Tomcat 5.0 product to "The Apache Jakarta Project and leading Tomcat contributor JBoss". There is one big problem with this attribution for us, Apache does not have a concept of leading contributors. It is completely out of sync with the very philosophies that lie at the heart of the Apache Software Foundation (ASF), as there are 70 committers to the Tomcat codebase, many of whom are employed by other companies or contribute individually. We would like to request that this be changed to: "Tomcat 5.0 (The Apache Software Foundation)" in both the press release (pdf url above) and the forthcoming June 2005 issue. Officially the name of the product is "Apache Tomcat 5.0" and not just "Tomcat 5.0", but I will leave it to your discretion as to whether you'd like to prefix Tomcat with Apache or not, as the subsequent mention of the ASF is fine. Many thanks, Henri Yandell V.P., Apache Jakarta - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Giorgio Gallo wrote: --Foreword Hi all, I never wrote to this list before today - though I've been lurking it since some time ago. Brave topic to make your first email :) I'm not a committer/contributor of any of ASF projects. My interest in this list is because I'm working (privately) on something I paln to donate when it will be a bit finished (if it doesn't prove a stupid idea). My opinion therefore does not count as a +1/-1 of sort (I imagine). Perfect counterweight to other opinions as you're not part of the core of the community (ie committers), so very worthwhile. Unless it comes down to an actual vote, it's as +1 /-1 as anyone elses I think. --Message I assume SD Magazine seems about to make a mistake which will upset some their readers (besides the ASF and -if any- the other companies wich "contribute" to tomcat): the "...and its leading contributor..." part is just plain wrong and senseless and I imagine SD will be more than happy to correct it. The correct way to credit a company for its de facto contributions to tomcat should be to mention it somwhere in the article (or to institute a "special prize") w/o attributing a product to the wrong entity - JBoss could request such a recognition from SD if it deemed appropriate. Also, I would not insist on having tomcat called "Apache Tomcat": after all, Jakarta itself refers to tomcat just as "Tomcat" and SD should be free to avoid utter redundancy in it's pages - their article is informational and not legal. So I would completely agree with Henri's original proposal regarding the naming, if my opinion meant anything ;) Good to hear :) Pushing for the 'Apache' in 'Apache Tomcat' in this instance seems a 50/50 choice. As of what concerns JBoss giving the correct credit to tomcat, I think their current attitude is more than satisfactory: just say they have a link to jakarta in their home page! (which, be it said without complaining, Jonas does *not* have). Well - it's under "JBoss projects" but doesn't it really mean they spend money on tomcat? Note it's not "JBoss products". Besides, does Hivemind in its homepage give credit to JBoss for using javassist? And does BMW give credit to Brembo for providing brakes? If they did though, they would have to give the credit in a correct legal way. Of course JBoss has a return on linking to Tomcat, but I think it's a problem of their marketing department whether the wording gives the impression of "we support tomcat" or "tomcat is ours" - ie: I don't think many of jboss' customers would appreciate the second interpretation and it's hard to believe that one of them ignores tomcat is an ASF product (if they do, they will discover it at the very moment they get a stack trace "org.apache.[...]"). My opinion is that JBoss is an "Honest Company wotking with open source": I don't know if there are companies trying to backstabbing ASF, but I think that for sure JBoss is none of them. I truly believe that it's just a case of aggressive marketing for their own products, which they have to do to defeat the huge monoliths that are IBM, BEA, Sun etc, leaking into how they market their involvement of our product, which can sometimes creep into the realm of distasteful. I would greatly appreciate an official ASF point of view regarding JBoss' current policy to be published in this list sometime in the near future - thanks I'll focus on resolving the issues, in both directions. I suspect that the ASF CCLA (company contributions agreement) is legally confusing and that the ASF need to explain/rethink how it is handled. Many thanks for the reply, Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005, Tim O'Brien wrote: On the -1's (or at least the negative opinions to this), we have Tim who thinks that it's a waste to talk to SD and we should focus on making sure the branding message is clearer. Henri, I'm not -1, you can send it if you want. You are (after all) Jakarta. :-) Thus while there's lots of agreement, my role is to stride purposefully around doing things, but when there's disagreement my role is to get confused and seek consensus. The community's -1s are the essential check to stop me being dangerously despotic. For example, I've no actual idea how many commits to Tomcat 5 and its accompanying modules are coming from the time that JBoss are donating, via their employees. It may be that leading contributor is, while not an 'Apache Way' to discuss something, a completely true piece of investigative journalism. There are definitely parts of Commons where a little bit of investigation could point out that "Yes, on DBUtils 1.0, David Graham was the lead developer" (Sorry David :) ). I doubt SD Magazine have actually done this, but they may have a correct answer anyway. I just wanted to voice the opinion that I don't think it constructive. Emotions on the whole JBoss/Apache issue run high, let's leave SD magazine out of it, and try to get JBoss to start calling it Apache Tomcat. Even though I know many think it an impossible task, let's resolve to sit down with someone from JBoss and hammer out the central issues like the "Apache Tomcat" trademark. Noted. As with Dim's in his email, I'm not 100% sure what official stand/communication has actually been taken with JBoss over the last year. What I know of was at an informal-level between the board and JBoss. I think we need to try to get the situation back into the hands of the Jakarta PMC/Tomcat committers so we can resolve things more amicably, as the board level things may seem too formal. I'll add it to my list of todos for the next quarter (another is hassling the board more about LGPL as that seemed to lose steam in the last quarter). I still think that the SD email is necessary, but I think the paragraph concerning contribution is on shaky ground; instead it should just highlight that we (the ASF) do not focus on leading contributions. I'll rewrite after I eat breakfast and send a copy to all the interested lists. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
>>As a matter of fact we have quite some committers in our >>community that are sponsored by the companies they are >>working for. Who is able to define whether who is the >>"leading" or "main" contributor? I would not want to risk >>picking the wrong one and pissing off other contributors. So >>either name them all or drop this classification. Terms like >>"main" or "leading" >>are a problem. >> > > > Again, anyone outside of the ASF is allowed to make any observations > they feel are warranted - regardless of ASF corporate policy. It might > fly in the face of what the ASF wants, but it doesn't make the statement > valid or invalid. Sure > Whether the PRC agrees with "a leading", "the > leading", "a main", "the main", makes little difference. SD can say > what they say; the real issue is the relationship between the ASF and > JBoss. Well, I don't know much about the ASF and JBoss story. (And I think I also don't want to know ;) But for me it's simple and not about JBoss. If it was some ACME company - it would still not be ok. It's just something you don't say or do. And what we should only point the magazine to is the fact that we don't like it. ...what they do is up to them. But just keeping our mouths shut and only rail about the fact probably does not help the JBoss relationship at all. > People at the ASF are so "worked up" over JBoss in particular (and vice > versa). Every time someone outside of both ASF and JBoss just makes an > observation that JBoss is a leading contributor, we set up the PR > machine and launch off some emails, maybe a few people will go over to > the TSS forums and blow up at Jboss people, and I could expect a few > nasty blog rants from both sides. Well, if you write something like that you have to cope with criticism. But I would aim at the magazine - not JBoss. ...maybe that's the difference. > I just don't think it's constructive, > that's all. Believe me now or hear me later - there are good things to > be gained from calming this situation down a little. TBH ...I think writing a polite letter is constructive. And as a homework we should try to realize it's not JBoss who wrote that line. That should calm everyone down. ...at least it should cheers -- Torsten signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
--Foreword Hi all, I never wrote to this list before today - though I've been lurking it since some time ago. I'm not a committer/contributor of any of ASF projects. My interest in this list is because I'm working (privately) on something I paln to donate when it will be a bit finished (if it doesn't prove a stupid idea). My opinion therefore does not count as a +1/-1 of sort (I imagine). --Message I assume SD Magazine seems about to make a mistake which will upset some their readers (besides the ASF and -if any- the other companies wich "contribute" to tomcat): the "...and its leading contributor..." part is just plain wrong and senseless and I imagine SD will be more than happy to correct it. The correct way to credit a company for its de facto contributions to tomcat should be to mention it somwhere in the article (or to institute a "special prize") w/o attributing a product to the wrong entity - JBoss could request such a recognition from SD if it deemed appropriate. Also, I would not insist on having tomcat called "Apache Tomcat": after all, Jakarta itself refers to tomcat just as "Tomcat" and SD should be free to avoid utter redundancy in it's pages - their article is informational and not legal. So I would completely agree with Henry's original proposal regarding the naming, if my opinion meant anything ;) As of what concerns JBoss giving the correct credit to tomcat, I think their current attitude is more than satisfactory: just say they have a link to jakarta in their home page! (which, be it said without complaining, Jonas does *not* have). Well - it's under "JBoss projects" but doesn't it really mean they spend money on tomcat? Note it's not "JBoss products". Besides, does Hivemind in its homepage give credit to JBoss for using javassist? And does BMW give credit to Brembo for providing brakes? Of course JBoss has a return on linking to Tomcat, but I think it's a problem of their marketing department whether the wording gives the impression of "we support tomcat" or "tomcat is ours" - ie: I don't think many of jboss' customers would appreciate the second interpretation and it's hard to believe that one of them ignores tomcat is an ASF product (if they do, they will discover it at the very moment they get a stack trace "org.apache.[...]"). My opinion is that JBoss is an "Honest Company wotking with open source": I don't know if there are companies trying to backstabbing ASF, but I think that for sure JBoss is none of them. I would greatly appreciate an official ASF point of view regarding JBoss' current policy to be published in this list sometime in the near future - thanks Regards, Giorgio Remy Maucherat wrote: Henri Yandell wrote: Due to the timeliness of this, I plan to send it Sunday night. Given that we're on a weekend, I doubt it will be read until Monday. Any opinions? I am definitely contributing to Tomcat as part of my employment at JBoss. I am not contributing on my own free time to Tomcat as an individual at the moment, and (as far as I can remember, as it was a while ago ...) have submitted a company CLA reflecting that (http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas). Anyway, it is obvious Apache has the notion of company contributions. Stating otherwise is wrong, and does not match the legal documents the ASF uses. I think continuing with the current attitude would only lead my company to reevaluate its involvement in ASF projects, and I could not really blame them if they did. Of course, this may be what some people here seek (hopefully, it is not and it's just my paranoia at work). Rémy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
Tim, AFAIK, Neither the Apache Board nor the Jakarta PMC has engaged JBoss or taken a stand on the situation. Whereas folks top down in JBoss have consistently sang the same tune. I personally faced this situation at WS-Edge 2005 (http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=46047) when Marc brought this up in a public forum (and me and geir remained silent on the issue). So, in your opinion, the Apache Board and Jakarta PMC should stay out of this *AS USUAL* (Please note that as individuals people can do what they want and the Board nor the PMC has any control). Right? -- dims On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 09:06:50 -0500, Tim O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Torsten Curdt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > As a matter of fact we have quite some committers in our > > community that are sponsored by the companies they are > > working for. Who is able to define whether who is the > > "leading" or "main" contributor? I would not want to risk > > picking the wrong one and pissing off other contributors. So > > either name them all or drop this classification. Terms like > > "main" or "leading" > > are a problem. > > > > Again, anyone outside of the ASF is allowed to make any observations > they feel are warranted - regardless of ASF corporate policy. It might > fly in the face of what the ASF wants, but it doesn't make the statement > valid or invalid. Whether the PRC agrees with "a leading", "the > leading", "a main", "the main", makes little difference. SD can say > what they say; the real issue is the relationship between the ASF and > JBoss. > > People at the ASF are so "worked up" over JBoss in particular (and vice > versa). Every time someone outside of both ASF and JBoss just makes an > observation that JBoss is a leading contributor, we set up the PR > machine and launch off some emails, maybe a few people will go over to > the TSS forums and blow up at Jboss people, and I could expect a few > nasty blog rants from both sides. I just don't think it's constructive, > that's all. Believe me now or hear me later - there are good things to > be gained from calming this situation down a little. > > Tim > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
> -Original Message- > From: Torsten Curdt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > As a matter of fact we have quite some committers in our > community that are sponsored by the companies they are > working for. Who is able to define whether who is the > "leading" or "main" contributor? I would not want to risk > picking the wrong one and pissing off other contributors. So > either name them all or drop this classification. Terms like > "main" or "leading" > are a problem. > Again, anyone outside of the ASF is allowed to make any observations they feel are warranted - regardless of ASF corporate policy. It might fly in the face of what the ASF wants, but it doesn't make the statement valid or invalid. Whether the PRC agrees with "a leading", "the leading", "a main", "the main", makes little difference. SD can say what they say; the real issue is the relationship between the ASF and JBoss. People at the ASF are so "worked up" over JBoss in particular (and vice versa). Every time someone outside of both ASF and JBoss just makes an observation that JBoss is a leading contributor, we set up the PR machine and launch off some emails, maybe a few people will go over to the TSS forums and blow up at Jboss people, and I could expect a few nasty blog rants from both sides. I just don't think it's constructive, that's all. Believe me now or hear me later - there are good things to be gained from calming this situation down a little. Tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
> On the -1's (or at least the negative opinions to this), we > have Tim who thinks that it's a waste to talk to SD and we > should focus on making sure the branding message is clearer. > Henri, I'm not -1, you can send it if you want. You are (after all) Jakarta. :-) I just wanted to voice the opinion that I don't think it constructive. Emotions on the whole JBoss/Apache issue run high, let's leave SD magazine out of it, and try to get JBoss to start calling it Apache Tomcat. Even though I know many think it an impossible task, let's resolve to sit down with someone from JBoss and hammer out the central issues like the "Apache Tomcat" trademark. Tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
> I think continuing with the current attitude would only lead my company > to reevaluate its involvement in ASF projects, and I could not really > blame them if they did. Of course, this may be what some people here > seek (hopefully, it is not and it's just my paranoia at work). I am sure the community is thankful for the individual contributions and therefor is also thankful for the companies letting their employees spend time for working on Apache projects. But... Usually companies don't let their employees spend so much time (and therefor money) just for the good of mankind. Usually they have an interest in fixing certain things because they want to benefit from a product being developed and maintained by a large number of developers they *don't* have to pay. As a matter of fact we have quite some committers in our community that are sponsored by the companies they are working for. Who is able to define whether who is the "leading" or "main" contributor? I would not want to risk picking the wrong one and pissing off other contributors. So either name them all or drop this classification. Terms like "main" or "leading" are a problem. Naming them all for such an award is very inappropriate IMO. No problem listing all the companies that contribute to a certain project somewhere. A contributors file ...or even on the website. But refering to JBoss as the main contributor is not in the spirit of the community IMO. So that's why we should ask for the change. Assuming JBoss will respect the community this should be no problem at all ...and be no reason to "reevaluate the involvement". cheers -- Torsten signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
RE: [draft] SD Magazine: request for change
Remy Maucherat wrote: > I am definitely contributing to Tomcat as part of my employment at > JBoss. I am not contributing on my own free time to Tomcat as an > individual at the moment If you look at the CLA, you'll see that all contributions are made by individuals, irrespective of motivation or employment status. > and (as far as I can remember, as it was a while ago ...) have > submitted a company CLA reflecting that A CCLA simply authorizes each employee to perform under the terms of their CLA. > it is obvious Apache has the notion of company contributions. Companies authorize individuals where their employment agreement might be in conflict with a CLA, and companies can provide a Software Grant in the case where the existing IP is owned by the company. This applies equally to IBM, Sun, BEA, Gluecode, DevTech, or JBoss. None of this is new. It has been discussed at length, and is fairly well established. This is a legal distinction having nothing to do with the promotional wording of the Jolt awards. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
