On 21/11/2012 23:49, Martin van den Bemt wrote:
Besides legal questions, I think the question is merely if we want
this to happen at the ASF.
Why aren't all other companies in there that are paying people to also
work on open source ?
How is possible that a company requires the ASF to put it in the
source repository. Isn't this a community decision ?
You actually made a specific branch to work on this code, which we can
based on the information I have see as a vendor branch ?
Why is this investment worth more than investments of other companies
in the various projects of the ASF. I can name a lot of companies
without their name in the NOTICE file which at least should receive
the same treatment.
It could be that my worry that a line is getting crossed here is based
on incorrect or incomplete information or that the spirit of these
kind of things have changed during my "inactivity". Based on what I
learned here more than 10 years ago from the "ASF veterans", this just
doesn't feel right.
Hi Martin,
I've just realized that there are few missing pieces in my mail below:
1. the feature we are talking about (Role Provisioning) was already
present in Syncope's roadmap [5] *before* any external engagement
2. I've created a separate branch for development purpose only, since
its scope is to be eventually merged into the trunk - as reported in
SYNCOPE-171 [6] (and explicitly requested by SURFnet, anyway)
3. This is my customer's customer request, not mine, and I am only
checking the compliance with ASF rules and principles; if this is not
feasible, I will just report to them
Having said that, I'd like to understand what "doesn't feel right" exactly:
a) the fact that someone is paying someone else to develop some code
for a feature in roadmap, and also requested such feature to be
contributed back to the original project instead of laying in some
private repository
b) the fact that they requested to report such fact into the project's
NOTICE file
If (b) - as I hope - do you think that things would have looked
differently if they would have asked me to develop the feature in a
private repository and then would have donated such code as a bundle (as
it seems to happen with Rave [2])?
Regards.
2012/11/21 Francesco Chicchiriccò <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Hi,
in Syncope we have been discussing [1] about some aspects related
to our
NOTICE file and wed like to ask your opinion about this.
A part of my current work for Syncope is actually paid by one of my
customers that is actually financed in turn by SURFnet.
They explicitly required that such code has to be part of the official
Syncope repository and releases and are also asking to include in the
NOTICE file the following extract:
Portions of this software are developed by the support of the
SURF, the
higher education and research partnership organization for
Information and
Communications Technology (ICT) in The Netherlands. For more
information
about SURF, please visit www.surf.nl <http://www.surf.nl>.
They have also provided a previous reference [2] in Apache Rave, for
which they have signed a corporate CLA [3] and software grant [4].
Do you see any issue with this? Is this fine, provided that they sign
another grant for Syncope?
Thanks for your support.
Regards.
[1] http://markmail.org/message/ux6xpt332uoqfjdq
[2]
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/rave/donations/surfconext-portal/coin-portal/trunk/NOTICE
[3] http://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-corporate.txt
[4] http://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
[5] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SYNCOPE/Roadmap
[6] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYNCOPE-171
--
Francesco Chicchiriccò
ASF Member, Apache Syncope PMC chair, Apache Cocoon PMC Member
http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
