Most of the work I have been putting into Apache, I've been paid for. That's why both I and my employer signed the CCLA. This was not work-for-hire, rather it was the expectation that the work was donated to Apache. This is no different than what Jeffery is doing.
As far as setting up a standard.... well, that is up to the PMC. We can reject any implementation that we wish -- no different than any other work or component that gets added in. Additionally, any of us could "correct" the component to the best of our abilities as soon as it gets donated. I don't see anything wrong with this. In fact, if any company came up to me and said "write this component and donate it to Apache -- here is a sack of money for you to do it" you bet your sweet ass I'm going to make the component and donate it to Apache. But then again, like many entrepreneurs, I have no problem whoring myself out for money... -Nick On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > On 11/14/12 9:30 AM, "Omar Gonzalez" <omarg.develo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I've kept quiet about this initiative until now, but, what seems odd to > me > > is the idea of someone trying to profit off of developing a component, in > > private (I'm assuming commits won't be directly into Apache's repo) and > > then passing it off as a contribution to OSS. It just seems odd and > > sheisty. Am I wrong? I could be... > That's a good question, and I hope the mentors will correct me if I'm > wrong, > but I believe as far as the ASF is concerned, the only thing that matters > is > that there is no implication that the ASF paid for such work. The ASF also > cares that no money comes into the ASF directly to a project, but I think > that isn't a factor here. > > I think it is ok (and I hope) that all of you will profit from the work > being done here. I am certainly being paid for my work here by Adobe, and > as far as the IRS is concerned, that shows up as net income (which is > effectively profit). > > Regarding the work being done "in private", I think that's ok too. The > Adobe Flex SDK was developed outside of Apache, so was the Mavenizer and > now > the GraniteDS stuff. Once it lands, there is plenty of time to comment, > change or even veto it before it gets released. > > If you do some work for a customer and then decide that it is worth > donating > to Apache Flex, it will have also been done off-list and that's ok too. > > @Maxime, both Adobe and Tink have separately donated Spark Navigators. And > that is fine from an Apache perspective. Someday (soon I hope) we will > decide which one to put in a release, and that discussion will happen on > the > mailin list. If you have an AutoComplete you wish do donate, please do so, > and the discussion whether to release yours or Jeffry's will be in the > community's hands and supposedly decided on technical merit. > > @Jeffry, If someone hooked up the autocomplete logic to a proprietary > natural language processing library, that would probably be a problem, but > I > doubt that will be the case. What I am concerned about, though, is that it > is based on your Flextras Autocomplete, so I think that means you/we have > to > make sure the copyrights are handled correctly and proper paperwork is > filed > for any code copyrighted to a legal entity other than you. Are the > copyrights in the existing code to Jeffry Houser or some other entity that > you control? > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > >
