Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> On 11/13/2013 04:34 PM, Colin McNamara wrote:
>> Not to be contrarian, but 92% of the commits in Havana came from
>> non-individual contributions. The majority of those came from big name
>> companies (IBM, RedHat, etc).
>
> ow, that's harsh. Despite what US Supreme Cour
On 13/11/13 17:22 -0700, John Griffith wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 11/11/2013 12:44 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 03:20:20PM +0100, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
Dear TC members,
Our companies are actively encouraging our respective customers
On 13/11/13 17:20 -0800, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
On 11/13/2013 04:34 PM, Colin McNamara wrote:
Not to be contrarian, but 92% of the commits in Havana came from
non-individual contributions. The majority of those came from big name
companies (IBM, RedHat, etc).
ow, that's harsh. Despite what US
On 14 November 2013 13:34, Colin McNamara wrote:
> Not to be contrarian, but 92% of the commits in Havana came from
> non-individual contributions. The majority of those came from big name
> companies (IBM, RedHat, etc).
>
> What I see as a great thing is the increasing number [and diversity] of
>
On 11/13/2013 04:34 PM, Colin McNamara wrote:
> Not to be contrarian, but 92% of the commits in Havana came from
> non-individual contributions. The majority of those came from big name
> companies (IBM, RedHat, etc).
ow, that's harsh. Despite what US Supreme Court Judges may think,
Companies are
Not to be contrarian, but 92% of the commits in Havana came from
non-individual contributions. The majority of those came from big name
companies (IBM, RedHat, etc).
What I see as a great thing is the increasing number [and diversity] of
companies committing, especially from end user/operators.
I
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 11/11/2013 12:44 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 03:20:20PM +0100, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear TC members,
>>>
>>> Our companies are actively encouraging our respective customers to have
>>> the
>>> patches t
On 11/11/2013 12:44 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 03:20:20PM +0100, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
Dear TC members,
Our companies are actively encouraging our respective customers to have the
patches they mission us to make be contributed back upstream. In order to
encourage thi
On 11/11/2013 12:27 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 11/11/2013 12:09 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:
What about something with attribution in the docs for the feature? Can
we play around with that a while? Attribution is going to have to be
incorporated better into the docs for the CC By licensing anyway. A
On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 21:16 +, Stangel, Dan wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 15:20 +0100, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
>
> > To enable this, we are proposing that the commit text of a patch may
> > include a
> >sponsored-by:
> > line which could be used by various tools to report on these commits
On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 15:20 +0100, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
> To enable this, we are proposing that the commit text of a patch may
> include a
>sponsored-by:
> line which could be used by various tools to report on these commits.
> Sponsored-by should not be used to report on the name of the c
On 11/12/2013 01:58 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> This proposal raises several questions.
>
> (1) Is it a good idea to allow giving credit to patch sponsors
>
> On one hand, this encourages customers of OpenStack service companies to
> fund sending back bugfixes and features upstream.
Does it? I'm
Nicolas Barcet wrote:
> [...]
> To enable this, we are proposing that the commit text of a patch may
> include a
>sponsored-by:
> line which could be used by various tools to report on these commits.
> [...]
This proposal raises several questions.
(1) Is it a good idea to allow giving cred
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 03:20:20PM +0100, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
>> Dear TC members,
>>
>> Our companies are actively encouraging our respective customers to have the
>> patches they mission us to make be contributed back upstream. In o
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 03:20:20PM +0100, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
> Dear TC members,
>
> Our companies are actively encouraging our respective customers to have the
> patches they mission us to make be contributed back upstream. In order to
> encourage this behavior from them and others, it would b
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:27:35PM -0500, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 11/11/2013 12:09 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:
> > What about something with attribution in the docs for the feature? Can
> > we play around with that a while? Attribution is going to have to be
> > incorporated better into the docs for
On 11/11/2013 12:09 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:
> What about something with attribution in the docs for the feature? Can
> we play around with that a while? Attribution is going to have to be
> incorporated better into the docs for the CC By licensing anyway. Any
> thoughts on docs as placement for "Thi
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
> Dear TC members,
>
> Our companies are actively encouraging our respective customers to have
> the patches they mission us to make be contributed back upstream. In order
> to encourage this behavior from them and others, it would be nice t
Dear TC members,
Our companies are actively encouraging our respective customers to have the
patches they mission us to make be contributed back upstream. In order to
encourage this behavior from them and others, it would be nice that if
could gain some visibility as "sponsors" of the patches in
19 matches
Mail list logo
