[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
12 matches
Mail list logo
