Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
>> Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
>>> Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
>>>> This is really great news!
>>>> I am going to start working at getting Chalmers to be one of the key
>>>> players in the foundation which would make the foundation even more
>>>> vendor-neutral. I am confident that this will go through.
>>> This almost sounds as if the Foundation isn't to be vendor-neutral
>>> from the start which is certainly not the intention of a foundation.
>>> What I like about other open source foundations (take the Plone
>>> Foundation from our community, for example) is that the members are
>>> developers, not companies. The developers govern themselves, every
>>> developer gets a vote.
>> I'm a bit confused, first of all Chalmers is a university, it is not a
>> software vendor.
> I guess you're right. But then I don't understand how Chalmers as a
> "key player" would make the Foundation more neural with respect to
> software vendors, as you say above.
I don't know but how do you make something less "vendor" oriented? That
would require a definition, but essentially you'd bring in non-vendors
(such as academic or non-profit organisations) to provide with some sort
of balance, instead of hiding companies between individuals' names. How
could it be done otherwise?
The code that I'm writing during working hours is (c) Copyright Chalmers
- it can't be otherwise, but it does not mean that I as a developer have
less decision power than the company that I'm working for.
>> Then when I look at the members of the Plone foundation (
>> http://plone.org/foundation/about/board/list ) I only see companies,
> I see *people*. If I remember correctly, the Plone Foundation even
> specifically says no to companies, just like the ASF. Of course, that
> doesn't mean that officers of the board in the foundation can't be
> employed somewhere...
> Btw, you're looking at the board. But still, they're just people, not
> companies. http://plone.org/foundation/members has the actual members
> list. These are the people that get to vote. As you can see, I'm in
> this list and I don't belong to any company. If this was company
> driven, I wouldn't have a vote.
ah OK. I didn't see that list.
However, most members do not write code during their free time, do they?
What happens when the members write code under working hours, their
respective employers must well have something to say about it?
>> except that ZC is not represented. So even if every member gets a vote,
>> how much does that vote count in the development process of Zope2, CMF
>> and Zope3 ?
> Well, it counts. How much does a vote count when you vote for your
> parliament? Little. But it counts.
I meant to say that the framework underneath (Zope, CMF) is such an
essential component that the development of Plone cannot be dissociated
from the development of CMF or Zope, which today happens to be managed
outside the Plone foundation.
But in the situation where ZC is involved in the foundation as one of
the player, obviously the development of the framework and of core
components managed by the members of the foundation is less concentrated
on one single vendor since others partners have their word to say.
This is a give-and-take situation.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -