[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> As it is now,
> one is pretty much left to rummage around on project web sites trying to get
> a gut feel for what is going on. Asking the higher-ups at work to reach
> technology management decisions based on my gut feel is an uphill climb.
So what you need is a docume
I'm replying to Ben because William's post is no longer on my news server.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to offer a couple of links to the kind of stuff I am talking
> about w.r.t. the "transparency" issue.
> First, some from Eclipse:
> http://www.eclipse.org/legal/ See especially the
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The overall goal is to remove a barrier to more widespread use of
> Open Source - growing the mindshare dedicated to it and potentially
> shrinking the mindshare dedicated to commercially-produced software.
While I don't agree with the dichotomy you present -- much o
Edward, thanks for the thoughtful comments.
I would like to offer a couple of links to the kind of stuff I am talking
about w.r.t. the "transparency" issue.
First, some from Eclipse:
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse%20IP%20Policy2006_03_20.pdf
http://www.eclipse.org/legal/ See espec
I have no deep connections to any open source projects. I do however know
quite a few engineers. Bear that in mind.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It seems to me that Open Source generally would be more pervasive if there
> was more transparency with respect to the practices observed within the
> p
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I hope the following message will not result in scorn being heaped
> upon me.
We try to heap scorn not upon individuals, but upon scorn-worthy ideas.
Also, we heap scorn upon people who heap their responses on top of the
quoted material. Please don't top-post.
> It
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It seems to me that Open Source generally would be more pervasive if
> there was more transparency with respect to the practices observed
> within the projects.
You mean something like: http://www.python.org/dev/
Tim Delaney
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/
All,
I hope the following message will not result in scorn being heaped upon me.
I know this is not a particularly fascinating topic for developers, but I
believe it is worth pursuing.
It seems to me that Open Source generally would be more pervasive if there
was more transparency with respect to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I agree with your point, which is why I asked the question. Risk cannot be
> eliminated, but it can be understood and managed so that useful work can
> still be done. If there is any way I can find out what the commiters do
> prior to reaching a decision to accept or reje
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have visited the Python web site and read some information on who the
> commiters are and how to go about submitting code to them, but I have not
> been able to locate any information regarding the process for vetting the
> code to identify any possible IP infr
Edward,
I agree with your point, which is why I asked the question. Risk cannot be
eliminated, but it can be understood and managed so that useful work can
still be done. If there is any way I can find out what the commiters do
prior to reaching a decision to accept or reject a particular submissi
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>> I work for a risk-averse company, and I want to compile a solid case for
>> obtaining and using Python at work.
>>
> Given the nature of the US Patent Office... You might as well lock
> the doors now...
>
> The Patent Office could issue a patent next week that makes all
Hi.
I have visited the Python web site and read some information on who the
commiters are and how to go about submitting code to them, but I have not
been able to locate any information regarding the process for vetting the
code to identify any possible IP infringement before it is committed. How
13 matches
Mail list logo
