Yup, all agreed with what you said below. Yoav
On 9/11/06, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yoav Shapira wrote: > Hi, > I think this is getting philosophical and off-topic... > > On 9/11/06, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> he he, we all have, including you, received money for consulting >> services due to our association and skillset gained from the ASF. > > Sure I have, and like I said I'm not criticizing that in any way. > >> if someone offers you $$ to fix a bug, that is no different. Whether the >> bug gets committed or not, has nothing to do with the $$, >> it simply follows the ASF process. > > What George is suggesting that no money would be paid unless a patch > is committed, so it's not just about the ASF process. yeah, that wont fly, but if someone is will to take that risk, ie doing work pro-bono so to speak, then again, its the agreement between the client and the vendor. > We all agree (I > think) that the patch review process will be followed as usual, and we > also all trust each other to have the good of the project and the ASF > in mind. None of these are the point. > >> no, but we all live in a monetary world, so unless we are trust fund >> babies, money has to come from somewhere. if you don't like to call that >> funding, fine, but its money, used for a purpose, in your case, pay for >> your time and your equipment that allows you to work on ASF projects :) > > That's a very abstract economic notion, under which indeed everything indeed, it follows the same basis that you are right now inhaling some of the same atoms that Napoleon did back in his days. > is paid for, including things like biological cell division, the gulf > stream in the ocean, etc. I bought my computer with money from my > current job, which has never had anything to do with the ASF. I use > it to do ASF work on my free time, etc. If you think that's the same > as someone paying me for a commit only after I make the commit (and if > you think the latter doesn't skew someone's priorities), we're living > in a different world, but that's OK ;) yes, you are completely right, no one can "pay to commit" meaning a commit is never guaranteed, the deal is completely outside the realm of ASF. however, if someone is willing to do it under his terms, its just a risk to the implementer since there is a chance he/she had to work for free, now, that would classify as free work :) think we've beaten this to death, sounds like we agree, a) he is allowed to solicit people, and pay them to do work, in this case it happens to be Tomcat bugs b) that work could result in patches being committed into the ASF code base c) there is no guarantee those patches will be committed, they are subject to the ASF rules and policies Filip > > Yoav > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
