I think you are assuming the community isn't composed of Corporations, when in fact, they play an important part in almost every successful Open Source project. From providing hardware to sponsoring conferences to paying developers to work on projects, companies play a critical role in the community. Apache is concerned, and rightly so, that a single company may gain too much control in a project, but Apache just plain wouldn't exist without corporate support. One of the core aspects of the ASF, the Apache Public License, encourages corporate acceptance of Open Source projects.
The core issue in this proposal is something that has bothered me about Struts for years - we do a poor job giving credit to contributors. I remember this one Open Source project I started playing with that would include a little note of thanks/credit next to a feature in the release notes, something simple like, "Added feature foo. Thanks Wendy for the patch!" Just that little note, a few characters really, did so much to encourage participation and build a community. Community members want to feel like they make a difference and when the only recognition they get is a patch buried in the depths of JIRA or even in a commit no one will ever see, the motivation isn't there. This proposal gives us an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone - put in place a sane, community-building attribution system, and give companies that want to give back to the community a clear path to get involved. The ASF and Struts, in particular, has always been about the community - isn't it time we started recognizing that? Don On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:49 AM, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm inclined to vote down anything mixing Community and Corporate agenda. I > think that's just a bad mix. In fact, the ASF has specific rules/guidelines > with respect to corporate involvement (employment) with too many project > leads. > > There's a reason that Apache projects are so successful, in one word ... > "community". I hate it as much as the next guy when movement seems to > stagnate for weeks/months, but that's never just cause to bring in > money/free stuff as incentive. > > The folks who want to help when there's a prize at the end will be the first > ones to dump your a## when you really need them, but don't have an incentive > to offer. > > If Struts (or any project) doesn't have enough volunteers to keep the work > going, then we have bigger issues. > > Just my $0.02! > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Robert Leland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Don I have a few questions > > > > 1) I agree that this contribution has to be valuable to the contributing > > company > > both technically and marketing. Back in 2003 when I obtained free IntelliJ > > licenses from Jetbrains for the Struts > > Committers all they wanted was acknowledgment on our web page and that was > > voted down as too commercial. > > To IntelliJ's credit they still provided the license and later expanded it > > to all of Apache. > > How has the Struts PMC changed since then to allow what your proposing ? > > > > 2) What if a proposal isn't on the short list of features, however when it > > is proposed the Struts community > > its viewed as a useful idea ? > > > > 3) What if it turns out that two competing companies have different > > implementations, which is a great place to be in. > > Do we need to think this far ahead or using Agile methods do we not > > want to over design this process initially ? > > > > > > -Rob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don Brown wrote: > > > > > As more and more companies start using open source software, many, > > > like mine, are looking for ways to give back to the community. They > > > want a way to contribute and ensure their contribution will be noticed > > > and appreciated. What if we had a feature sponsorship program that > > > encouraged companies to donate engineering time to filling out needed > > > features in Struts? > > > > > > I imagine it would work like this: > > > 1. The Struts community comes up with a short list of desired > > > features with high-level specs > > > 2. Companies (or individuals) could "sign up" for a feature and > > > donate internal engineering time to implementing the feature > > > 3. The Struts community would review then commit the feature > > > 4. The release notes for that version and perhaps somewhere on the > > > website would note who gets credit for the feature > > > > > > This would help those that want to donate time what features are most > > > needed by the community and give them a way to receive recognition for > > > their work in a very public way. A key component in this proposal > > > is the way credit is given to the work, something that might encourage > > > the marketing departments of the respective companies. The list of > > > desired features is also important as it ensures their effort will not > > > be in vain, and it also implies the support of the Struts dev > > > community to work to apply the patch in a timely manner. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > Don > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > James Mitchell > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
