harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Legal] Requirements for Committers
Date Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:13:47 GMT

On Jun 23, 2005, at 3:36 AM, usman bashir wrote:

> Hi!
>  gier! i m from Pakistan and here and in even our some neigbouring
> counteries like INDIA etc , the employer has the right over only those
> things that we write for them. but not for those whom we write for  
> us , so
> even it is possible to do parrallel work for others.
>  but as u suggested a letter from our contractor, i can provide but  
> it ll
> certainly raise some eyebrowse here even though it is not going to  
> help
> harmory me or my company:)
>  as for as other restrcition are concern i am free from them as i  
> have never
> feel concern what the Sun writes for us. so even though having more  
> then
> onse src.zip (as due to several JDKs on my machine) , i never dig  
> into their
> codes.
>  so i request u either reiterate over ur statment about company  
> statement
> and if u r still looking over it then i have to mess up with my PM.

We'll have a new version of this out here on the list soon that  
addresses this.  I think that you won't have to go hassle your  
manager or employer if there is clearly no right over the work you  
would be doing for Harmony.


>  On 6/14/05, Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk> wrote:
>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>> On Jun 9, 2005, at 3:48 AM, Robin Garner wrote:
>>>>> 8) Employment Limitations
>>>>> Are you employed as a programmer, systems analyst, or other
>>>>> IT professional? If so, you may be an commiter
>>>>> only if your employer either:
>>>>> a) signs a Corporate Contribution License Agreement with Apache
>>>>> and lists you as a designated employee or
>>>>> b) submits a written authorization for your participation in this
>>>>> project and disclaims any copyright or confidentiality interest
>>>>> in your current or future contributions to this project.
>>>> To me, this is _way_ too restructive.
>>> It is very restrictive, and is a starting point for the discussion.
>>> This is a real problem, I think. I believe that people don't
>>> understand the restrictions they are working under, and the
>>> ramifications of what can happen.
>>>> While this kind of statement
>>>> wouldn't be a problem for me currently, from time to time I've been
>>>> employeed by either a large company or the Australian Government,
>>>> neither
>>>> of which have any legal rights to anything I do out of hours,  
>>>> but who
>>>> would have conniptions if asked to sign an agreement like this.  
>>>> Simply
>>>> because the pointy haired bosses wouldn't understand what it was  
>>>> about,
>>>> and would go into knee-jerk abnegation-of-responsibility mode.
>>> Well, what do we do? I'm not sure we can punt here, but clearly we
>>> want to make it so the broadest community can participate.
>> Clearly your requirements only apply if the contributor's employer  
>> has
>> rights to their contribution. If the employer has no rights, then all
>> the contributor need do is to state that.
>> Cheers,
>> Ben.
>> --
>>>>> ApacheCon Europe<<< http://www.apachecon.com/
>> http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/
>> "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
>> doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff
> -- 
> Usman Bashir
> Certified IBM XML Solution Developer
> Certified UML Developer
> Brainbench Certified Internet Perfessional[advance](BCIP)
> Brainbench Certified Java Perfessional (BCJP)
> Brainbench Certified .NET Perfessional
> Brainbench Ceritified C++ Perfessional (BCCP)
> Software engineer IT24
> Faculty Member Operation Badar Lahore

Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437

View raw message