You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to notifications@community.apache.org by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2025/12/28 20:08:47 UTC
[PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
rbowen opened a new pull request, #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216
This is far, far, far from complete, or even a first draft. Just making it public so that people can see what I'm working on.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649916124
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
+
+<div class="col-md-4">
+<!-- Sponsor -->
+
+### [Financial Sponsorship](/companies/sponsor.html)
+
+[](/companies/sponsor.html)
+
+Companies can provide crucial financial support through ASF sponsorship, in-kind donation of services, Community Over Code conference sponsorship, local meetup support, and direct contributor sponsorship programs.
Review Comment:
Yes, I know that "direct contributor sponsorship" is here, but I think it's a very different thing for both contributors and companies, and it deserves a separate entry, because it introduces "maintainership" concept. Companies do not understand that OSS project need "maintenance". They only think in terms of "bugs" and "features". But "maintainership" is so much more and different than that and we need to be very precise - I think - on educating companies that it exists - not as the last point in the "Sponsor" part - especially that "supporting maintainers" is very different from "sponsoring".
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649914505
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
Happy to move some of the description to "support.html" - I just think it should be created first so that I can comment on it in the PR.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658330478
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
BTW. there are different ways that companies can pay maintainers without entering the employment status -> for example Tidal. GitHub Sponsors (I have been paid a nice one-time sum from Amazon few years back for example - without ever entering any business relationship with Amazon). I think - if we are recognizing "employment" for "individual contributors" - not recognizing all those options (which are different than sponsoring) - would simply miss out on making it a clear and possible option to follow - and for both parties, individuals, and companies.
I truly hope that by recognizing it as a "possibility" by the ASF will allow both individuals an companies to pursue it much more "vigorously" - and with more legitimacy.
I think having more options to follow that are "OK" is better than less - because it limits a number of cases where people do not want or "can't" enter employment relationship, or by companies that have different budgets and processes for "employees" vs. "contractors".
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "hen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
hen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658447742
##########
source/companies/employ.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+---
+title: Employing Open Source Contributors
+url: /companies/employ.html
+tags: ["companies", "employment", "contributors"]
+---
+
+# Employing Open Source Contributors
+
+If your business relies on an open source project, employing, or
+otherwise financially supporting,
+contributors to the project is the most effective way to ensure that
+your priorities are reflected in project decisions.
+(See also [Recruiting and Employee
+Satisfaction](/companies/benefits.html#recruiting-and-employee-satisfaction))
+
+This goes [far beyond code contributions](/contributors/non-code.html),
+although that is the most obvious and visible way that you can participate.
+
Review Comment:
So how do companies find these people to support?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649913944
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
```suggestion
### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
[](/companies/employ.html)
The impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
</div><!-- End Support -->
### [Support individual contributors](/companies/support.html)
[](/companies/support.html)
Another impactful way companies support open source is by financially supporting individual maintainers who maintain the projects. Maintainership often means a lot of work that is not easily classified as "new features" or "bug fixes" - there is a lot of thankless but necessary work needed in successful projects that maintainers do - making releases in a smooth and predictable way, continuous update of dependencies, reacting to security vulnerabilities, mentoring and "recruiting" new contributors, spreading the word about the project, triaging issues, reviewing PRs, improving documentation and a lot more.
Supporting people financially (via B2B contracts, Individual Sponsorships, Fellowships) makes it possible for the Open Source community to keep their projects healthy and proactively addresss issues before they even happen. Think of regular checkups at the doctor being far more effective than going to the doctor when you start experiencing problems.
.
</div><!-- End Support -->
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651778838
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
I don't understand the distinction you're making here. Happy to have you write such a document if you want, though.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2657042847
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
I think it's a bit too detailed of a description that has no "i instantly understand it" vibe. I think this is what @rbowen also wants to achieve here (that's my understanding) that the message is "short" and "easy to grasp" even by somoene who does not understand how Open source works in detail - so this should be rather on a "slogan" side of things.
So in a sense "influence project trajectory" is a good "slogan" - even if ti can be a little too much crossing the "line" that ASF puts on the project decision making.
I would rather formulate it in a way that is positive, but also asserively sets the boundaries and is very "open" about communicating ASF position. For example:
"While companies, cannot directly influence direction of the project, when you hire committers and PMC members, their incentives are naturally more aligned with your company goals".
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658944253
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
So why call it employment and not cooperation then ? I think it muddies the waters if we call it employment but think something else than employment is ok as well - and splitting that into separateemployment/other forms of contract does not seem to introduce too much of complexity ?
Employment and contractors are not permitting things - those are two legally distinct forms of cooperation - simply.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658317354
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
> Suggesting that full-time employees cannot make decisions that balance the project with their employer is contrary to my experience at the ASF.
I do not mean suggesting that. I just merely say that not being employed gives you more freedom (for example the above freedom to be paid by competitor). I negotiated in my contracts with all my customers that it's ok if their direct competition pay me as well. I have not seen an employment contract where this would be allowed and welcome.
> and stating that one can ONLY do this as an independent contributor is diametrically opposed to that message. So I'm ... reluctant. Perhaps you can convince me.
I was very careful to NOT say it this way. I only stated that it's different and gives individual more "income" safety (for example by the fact that you can get money from competitors). But I am absolutely aware that it's not the only way. Vast majority of people who are paid for OSS work are paid by their employees - I am fully aware of it. But I would like to make it clear that it's not the **only** way. Similarly as you do not want to say that the **only** way is to be independent, I want to state that it's not the only way to get paid to be **employee**.
It's very symmetrical IMHO, both are valid and have different set of incentives, freedoms and motivations.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649959305
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
How about separate one (support.md) ? For me employment is **completely** different than "supporting maintainers" who are not employees. For one employment practically excludes being supported simultaneously by competitors, while supporting maintiners does not. I would like to expand on that -and explain the difference in more datail.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649929044
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
Review Comment:
> This is covered in the sub-page. The _index.md page is intentionally as terse as possible, with expansion on the sub-pages.
Sure I can suggest it in the sub-page
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658461044
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
I feel that for us (ASF) far greater benefit is to establish relationships between people - (for example employees of a company and maintainers). I do not want to introduce any intermediary, but to explain that companies can benefit for making their employees having good relationships with maintainers - even if they are not maintainers themselves. This is how it works in Airflow for example. As maintainers - we have great personal relationships with Amazon employees who contribute to Airflow, also with their management who contributes to the Airflow Summit.
And we work closely with those Amazon employees mainly because we have great relationship with them - not because they are Amazon employees. Same with Astronomer and Google.
We (PMC) vaalue Amazon, Astronomer and Google as stakeholders and we are grateful for them spending their energy and effort on Airflow. but we are not even supposed (as a PMC) to have relation with Amazon, Google or Astronomer. The best those companies can do (in relation to PMC) is to align incentives of their employees who are contributors and PMC members.
I think saying that `PMC` can have any "project direction" relationship directly with the companies - would be IMHO quite contradicting a lot of the "Vendor independence" in ASF. In ASF such relation should only be done **through** individuals who might or might not be employees, or even contractors of those companies. And I think we should be very clear about it.
> This feels like you are advocating some sort of intermediary to broker such connections with projects.
Not sure what kind of intermediary we are talking about. PMC <-> individual contributor relationship is clear. PMC <> company relationship is essentially "should not happen". So if we are talking about PMC <> individual contributor <> Company relationship - the individual is intermediary. I do not see any other intermediaries here.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651824962
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
A bit more explanation, long, but I hope it can clarify it:
Employee (prety much always by definitiion) has a non-compete agreemeent and cannot cooperate with other stakeholders. This is regular clause in employment contracts, and one that is even valid according to California Laws. The laws in California forbid Employers to restrict people to switch to competition, but it's standard (and kind of morally correct) to expect your employees to also cooperate - while they are employees - (and get some money from) with your direct competition. This is expected by all the laws about employment I saw. And main reasons I refused to be an employee of Astronomer for example.
When it comes to "supporting maintainers" rather than "employing them" - such "support maintainers" does not imply (and actually it makes no sense) to have a clause forbidding the maintainer to be supported by direct competition of the company that supports the maintainer.
I think there is a huge difference between the two - and one that makes individuals much more empowered in the whole process.
Like in my case - I am supported by Astronomer and Google - both pay me to be "maintainer". If I were an employee of either of those - that would be impossible to be paid by the other, because this violates the standard "non-compete" agreements. I could "work on Airflow" for free - but legally, i would not be able to be paid by the competitor. Not mentioning any other agreements I can have. Employment contract heavily limits usually who you can get paid from.
For me - personally - it gives a lot more freedom, flexibility and also independence - my sources of income come from several, independent stakeholders, legally allowed in the contracts I have, and I do not have to make my decisions making to account "what happens if I loose my single income source". Not that I ever had to face that choice - actually, the fact that I have different stakeholders supporting me, this means that my decsion making process is far less influenced by it.
It's basically the same dillemma that ASF as an organisation faces (and any other Foundation). If they have a single source of income - no matter how hard you try, if you are not ready to quit "now", basically the one who holds your single source of income has a real impact on the decisions you make. This is why important point of ASF is either to always have a way out or to diversify the funding. Both are good strategies.
This is the same with individuals - yes, the commitership and PMC membership is with **you** - but if you are not ready to **quit** at any time without fear when you are an employee, or if you do not have diverse source of income, then employer who at any point in time can say "Don't do it, or this is your last thing you do as our employee" - they can have an upper hand on decision making of such an individual.
This is very basic thing - diversification of the source of your income. This is basic thing when you are investing money, but also this shoudl be - IMHO - one of the basic strategues to maintain your independence. Being able to quit any time is also a good one, and combining the two - being able to quit AND diversify - is an ultimate "I make my own decisions, for what I think is best for the project" safety net.
And yeah I will push a more detailed fixup for that soon.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2652713915
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> ...advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. Key among these is the ability to influence the project's trajectory through employees who have earned committer status. It's important to think strategically...
I personally think this is quite against the spirit of the ASF to suggest that this way. Wth the Apache Way, the whole idea is that individuals act on their own behalf, and with the direction of the project not being "skewed" unnecessarily by the fact that the company employs committers and PMC members.
Of course that's a bit of idealistic approach to think that employees interests are neglected by their employees - that would be insane to think tihs is happening. However I think in this case this work in a bit of a different direction (Ideally - according to how ASF model of influence on the project should work).
I think by employing committers and PMC members, what company achieves is not "influencing the trajectory" directly, but making PMC members and committers incentives more aligned with the company interests.
There is a subtle difference there - as a company management you should not be able to "tell" those PMC members what to approve and what to not approve, you can tell them what is the overall direction the company is going and let those PMC members and committers decide what they do - whether it aligns with this direction, or not.
I think "influence the trajectory" might be understood more of "tell employees what changes they should implement and release" - which of course happens. But it has nothing to do with what "committer" status gives. Committers can "approve" things. Anyone can implement them. What you implement and submit as a PR to the project (as employee) is logically different thing that what you "accept" as a "committer". Your employee can tell you to "work on something" but they cannot tell you to "get something merged" - not formally and legally according to the ICLA every committer and PMC member signs.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658468608
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> I like the alignment angle. Just a nit: Starting a 'Benefits' section with a negative ('While companies cannot...') might be less appealing. How about we flip it to focus on the positive 'bridging' aspect first?
It might be cultural difference where I prefer to say "be careful, but do it" rather than "do it, but be careful". But I am perfectly OK with it as long as it is clear that the decision making stay with individuals who contribute - no matter their "employment/contracting" status. And that it's ok if their decisions are different than their employees/ This is where "aligining the incentives" play a big role - because it means that they cannot "expect" that people will follow their goals, but that they should make it so that their employees want to do so.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658944253
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
So why call it employment and not cooperation then ? I think it muddies the waters if we call it employment but think something else than employment is ok as well - and splitting that into separateemployment/other forms of contract does not seem to introduce too much of complexity ?
Employment and contractors are not permutting things - those are two legally distinct and recognized forms of cooperation - simply.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649918509
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
Review Comment:
This is covered in the sub-page. The _index.md page is intentionally as terse as possible, with expansion on the sub-pages.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649959305
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
How about separate one? For me employment is **completely** different than "supporting maintiainers" who are not employees. For one employment practically excludes being supported simultaneously by competitors, while supporting maintiners does not. I would like to expand on that -and explain the difference in more datail.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651835169
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
> What change are you suggesting here?
I already did -> I moved all the changes above (from _index.md) to "benefits.md" Those are the suggestions I proposed - adding two more paragraphs under the original one which focused on the "long-term" benefits. The two paragraphs I proposed are focusing more on the short-term benefits and actual ways companies migh save money in shorter term (making their teams more productive)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2652713915
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> ...advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. Key among these is the ability to influence the project's trajectory through employees who have earned committer status. It's important to think strategically...
I personally think this is quite against the spirit of the ASF to suggest that this way. Wth the Apache Way, the whole idea is that individuals act on their own behalf, and with the direction of the project not being "skewed" unnecessarily by the fact that the company employs committers and PMC members.
Of course that's a bit of idealistic approach to think that employees interests are neglected by their employees - that would be insane to think tihs is happening. However I think in this case this work in a bit of a different direction (Ideally - according to how ASF model of influence on the project should work).
I think by employing committers and PMC members, what company achieves is not "influencing the trajectory" directly, but making PMC members and committers incentives more aligned with the company interests.
There is a subtle difference there - as a company management you should not be able to "tell" those PMC members what to approve and what to not approve, you can tell them what is the overall direction the company is going and let those PMC members and committers decide what they do - whether it aligns with this direction, or not.
I think "influence the trajectory" might be understood more of "tell employees what changes they should implement and release" - which of course happens. But it has nothing to do with what "committer" status gives. Committers can "approve" things. Anyone can implement them. What you implement and submit as a PR to the project (as employee) is logically different thing that what you "accept" as a PMC member as "committer". Your employee can tell you to "work on something" but it cannot tell you to "get something merged" - not formally and legally according to the ICLA every committer and PMC member signs.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Best practice for companies around ASF projects [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2699399010
##########
source/companies/employ.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+---
+title: Employing Open Source Contributors
+url: /companies/employ.html
+tags: ["companies", "employment", "contributors"]
+---
+
+# Employing Open Source Contributors
+
+If your business relies on an open source project, employing, or
+otherwise financially supporting,
+contributors to the project is the most effective way to ensure that
+your priorities are reflected in project decisions.
+(See also [Recruiting and Employee
+Satisfaction](/companies/benefits.html#recruiting-and-employee-satisfaction))
+
+This goes [far beyond code contributions](/contributors/non-code.html),
+although that is the most obvious and visible way that you can participate.
+
Review Comment:
Or - again let me repeat it - you might look for getting a maintainer on another type of contract, not employment.
For many companies, this is often a decision to make (and there is a significant difference):
* employ peipole
* contract with external people (software houses for example, or individual consultants)
This has very different properties - starting from non-compete (mentioned), going through much more flexible part-time or even hourly-based or task-based contract models.
In case of contracting non-employees - for example - companies might even use 3rd-parties (such as Tidelift, HeroDev and many similar) to setup those relationships - and this is **not** employment - in very strict legal sense of it. And it actually might help to solve the "how do companies find those people" - because they can do that through those third parties (and many already do).
Employment has very concrete definition and a lot of limitations - other forms of contract can be much more flexible.
I would strongly advocate for making it clear that "employment" is not the only way companies might make maintainers get money - and I am not really sure why this seems to be a controversial thing to add those form of contracts explicitly (it seems pretty obvious - both, that is happening already and that is very distinct from employment).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649931871
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
I think some of those are listed below *establishing relationships" - but those are a bit "slogans" and if someone reads it, I think it should be clear what is the actual "gain" they have. I believe the first chapnter is the one that wil be read by somoene in the companies - to make quick decisions, the "details" below are nice but they do not show "what do I have" - for example "establishing relationship" does not ring "I save money" for corporate user. While "saving weeks of work" for your team "through establishing relationships" does.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658461044
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
I feel that for us (ASF) far greater benefit is to establish relationships between people - (for example employees of a company and maintainers). I do not want to introduce any intermediary, but to explain that companies can benefit for making their employees having good relationships with maintainers - even if they are not maintainers themselves. This is how it works in Airflow for example. As maintainers - we have great personal relationships with Amazon employees who contribute to Airflow, also with their management who contributes to the Airflow Summit.
And we work closely with those Amazon employees mainly because we have great relationship with them - not because they are Amazon employees. Same with Astronomer and Google.
We (PMC) vaalue Amazon, Astronomer and Google as stakeholders and we are grateful for them spending their energy and effort on Airflow. but we are not even supposed (as a PMC) to have relation with Amazon, Google or Astronomer. The best those companies can do (in relation to PMC) is to align incentives of their employees who are contributors and PMC members.
I think saying that `PMC` can have any "project direction" relationship directly with the companies - would be IMHO quite contradicting a lot of the "Vendor independence" in ASF. In ASF such relation should only be done **through** individuals who might or might not be employees, or even contractors of those companies. And I think we should be very clear about it.
> This feels like you are advocating some sort of intermediary to broker such connections with projects.
Not sure what kind of intermediary we are talking about. PMC <-> contributor relationship is clear. PMC <> company relationship is essentially "should not happen". So if we are talking about PMC <> individual <> Company relationship - the individual is intermediary. I do not see any other intermediaries here.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "hen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
hen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658445531
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Why your company should participate in ASF projects
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software,
+and **ASF projects are everywhere**.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and **influence the direction of these projects** for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant
+strategic and operational benefits to companies, including talent
+acquisition, influence over industry standards, strong company
+partnerships, and greater customer trust.<br />
+[[Read more ...](/companies/benefits.html)]
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
Review Comment:
Perhaps this is a "Sponsor Individuals" and the next one is "Sponsor Projects"
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "hen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
hen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658446003
##########
source/companies/advocacy.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+---
+title: Open Source Advocacy
+url: /companies/advocacy.html
+tags: ["companies", "advocacy", "branding"]
+---
+
+# Open Source Advocacy
+
+TO BE WRITTEN:
+
+Focus on:
Review Comment:
Can we link to good examples?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658477905
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Why your company should participate in ASF projects
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software,
+and **ASF projects are everywhere**.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and **influence the direction of these projects** for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant
+strategic and operational benefits to companies, including talent
+acquisition, influence over industry standards, strong company
+partnerships, and greater customer trust.<br />
+[[Read more ...](/companies/benefits.html)]
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
Review Comment:
> Would love to see a different title used here as employing contributors directly has many issues.
I do think we **should** mention employment as one of the options (contracting and sponsoring individuals as well) - becaue it's the fact and even welcome that many contributors, committers, PMC members are employees. This is a good thing - for example one that allows Airflow to thrive (amongst other things). But I think we should just be explicit about boundaries of the influence - this is what I wanted to clarify how much influence companies might expect (see my "aligining incentives" proposal).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658047447
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
Suggesting that full-time employees cannot make decisions that balance the project with their employer is contrary to my experience at the ASF. I've put a "Support individual contributors" section in employ.md because I think that it's just a nuanced difference over full-time employes, and not "completely different", as you state here. Indeed, my ENTIRE GOAL with this set of documents is to help companies foster open source contribution in a project-first way, and stating that one can ONLY do this as an independent contributor is diametrically opposed to that message. So I'm ... reluctant. Perhaps you can convince me.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658308935
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
> This is not universally true. Some companies have explicit permission to participate in any open source project, regardless of who is participating (competitor or not).
It's not about participating in open-source projects but about being paid by competition. I can't imagine an employment contract where it's ok, where competitor of your employer allows you to be paid by their competitor. This is pretty much always forbidden (and considered conflict of interests).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649929642
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
However, such cooperation works in both directions and some of them are short term - when maintainers see company that is actively participating in the project, they are eager to help and solve problems that individuals from the company are raising.
Personal relationships with maintainers also makes it possible to save even weeks of going in a wrong direction in your deployments, because maintainers will know your context and will be able to help to make better decisions.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649916611
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
Review Comment:
I fall victim of that far too often - specifying a number of things listed below is just very prone to get wrong when the list grows or shrinks.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649910457
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
Review Comment:
```suggestion
There are several primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2652713915
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> ...advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. Key among these is the ability to influence the project's trajectory through employees who have earned committer status. It's important to think strategically...
I personally think this is quite against the spirit of the ASF to suggest that this way. Wth the Apache Way, the whole idea is that individuals act on their own behalf, and with the direction of the project not being "skewed" unnecessarily by the fact that the company employs committers and PMC members.
Of course that's a bit of idealistic approach to think that employees interests are neglected by their employees - that would be insane to think tihs is happening. However I think in this case this work in a bit of a different direction (Ideally - according to how ASF model of influence on the project should work).
I think by employing committers and PMC members, what company achieves is not "influencing the trajectory" directly, but making PMC members and committers incentives more aligned with the company interests.
There is a subtle difference there - as a company management you should not be able to "tell" those PMC members what to do, you can tell them what is the overall direction the company is going and let those PMC members and committers decide what they do - whether it aligns with this direction, or not.
I think "influence the trajectory" might be understood more of "tell employees what changes they should implement" - which of course happens, but it has nothing to do with "committer" status. What you implement and submit as a PR to the project (as employee) is logically different thing that what you "accept" as a PMC member as "committer". Your employee can tell you to "work on something" but it cannot tell you to "get something merged" - not formally and legally according to the ICLA every committer and PMC member signs.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "chia7712 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
chia7712 commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2653006983
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
I really like your point about 'alignment of incentives.'
Perhaps we can frame it this way: Having employees who are committers ensures that the company's use cases and business context are deeply understood within the PMC. It’s not about a manager telling a committer what to merge (which violates the ICLA), but about the committer bringing a pragmatic, real-world perspective to the decision-making table. This naturally bridges the gap between the project's roadmap and the company's needs.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658944271
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
So why call it employment and not cooperation then ? I think it muddies the waters if we call it employment but think something else than employment is ok as well - and splitting that into separateemployment/other forms of contract does not seem to introduce too much of complexity ?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2662011746
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
Would it be too much to ask to rename the `title` to `Employ or contract with contributors` ?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Best practice for companies around ASF projects [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2699500846
##########
source/companies/employ.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
+---
+title: Employing Open Source Contributors
+url: /companies/employ.html
+tags: ["companies", "employment", "contributors"]
+---
+
+# Employing Open Source Contributors
+
+If your business relies on an open source project, employing, or
Review Comment:
```suggestion
If your business relies on an open source project, employing, contracting with or
```
Maybe?
##########
source/companies/employ.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
+---
+title: Employing Open Source Contributors
+url: /companies/employ.html
+tags: ["companies", "employment", "contributors"]
+---
+
+# Employing Open Source Contributors
Review Comment:
```suggestion
# Employing or Contracting with Open Source Contributors
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649930019
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
I moved the comments here. The first chapter is somewhat discouraging about the "short-term" gains, so I think it's worth to mention specific "short-term" gains the companies can have by establishing relationship with maintainers.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Best practice for companies around ASF projects [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2699503524
##########
source/companies/employ.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
+---
+title: Employing Open Source Contributors
+url: /companies/employ.html
+tags: ["companies", "employment", "contributors"]
+---
+
+# Employing Open Source Contributors
+
+If your business relies on an open source project, employing, or
+otherwise financially supporting,
+contributors to the project is the most effective way to ensure that
+your priorities are reflected in project decisions.
+(See also [Recruiting and Employee
+Satisfaction](/companies/benefits.html#recruiting-and-employee-satisfaction))
+
+This goes [far beyond code contributions](/contributors/non-code.html),
+although that is the most obvious and visible way that you can participate.
+
+Think of staffing an open source project exactly the same way you would
+think about staffing an internal software development project. What
Review Comment:
```suggestion
think about staffing an internal software development project or working with external contractors. What
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Best practice for companies around ASF projects [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2699113846
##########
source/companies/employ.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+---
+title: Employing Open Source Contributors
+url: /companies/employ.html
+tags: ["companies", "employment", "contributors"]
+---
+
+# Employing Open Source Contributors
+
+If your business relies on an open source project, employing, or
+otherwise financially supporting,
+contributors to the project is the most effective way to ensure that
+your priorities are reflected in project decisions.
+(See also [Recruiting and Employee
+Satisfaction](/companies/benefits.html#recruiting-and-employee-satisfaction))
+
+This goes [far beyond code contributions](/contributors/non-code.html),
+although that is the most obvious and visible way that you can participate.
+
Review Comment:
I feel like this starts with ownership. If you believe that investing in a project is critical to your company, then you hire people to do that work, just like you would with any product you were going to take to market. Viewing open source as somehow fundamentally different than an in-house software development project is the root of many antipaterns in how companies interact with open source. They're really the same thing.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649932365
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
```suggestion
Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
However, such cooperation works in both directions and some of them are short term - when maintainers see company that is actively participating in the project, they are eager to help and solve problems that individuals from the company are raising.
Personal relationships with maintainers also makes it possible to save even weeks of going in a wrong direction in your deployments, because maintainers will know your context and will be able to help to make better decisions.
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rich7420 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rich7420 commented on PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#issuecomment-3698866746
Thanks @rbowen! The only thing I can do is pick on a little grammar. I appreciate what you’ve provided.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651824962
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
A bit more explanation, long, but I hope it can clarify it:
Employee (prety much always by definitiion) has a non-compete agreemeent and cannot cooperate with other stakeholders. This is regular clause in employment contracts, and one that is even valid according to California Laws. The laws in California forbid Employers to restrict people to switch to competition, but it's standard (and kind of morally correct) to expect your employees to also cooperate (and get some money from) with your direct competition. This is expected by all the laws about employment I saw. And main reasons I refused to be an employee of Astronomer for example.
When it comes to "supporting maintainers" rather than "employing them" - such "support maintainers" does not imply (and actually it makes no sense) to have a clause forbidding the maintainer to be supported by direct competition.
I think there is a huge difference between the two - and one that makes individuals much more empowered in the whole process.
Like in my case - I am supported by Astronomer and Google - both pay me to be "maintainer". If I were an employee of either of those - that would be impossible to be paid by the other, because this violates the standard "non-compete" agreements. I could "work on Airflow" for free - but legally, i would not be able to be paid by the competitor. Not mentioning any other agreements I can have. Employment contract heavily limits usually who you can get paid from.
For me - personally - it gives a lot more freedom, flexibility and also independence - my sources of income come from several, independent stakeholders, legally allowed in the contracts I have, and I do not have to make my decisions taking into account "what happens if I loose my single income source". Not that I ever had to face that choice - actually, the fact that I have different stakeholders supporting me, this means that my decsion making process is far less influenced by it.
It's basically the same dillemma that ASF as an organisation forces (and any other Foundation). If they have a single source of income - no matter how hard you try, if you are not ready to quit "now", basically the one who holds your single source of income has a real impact on the decisions you make. This is why important point of ASF is either to always have a way out or to diversify the funding. Both are good strategies.
This is the same with individuals - yes, the commitership and PMC membership is with **you** - but if you are not ready to **quit** at any time without fear when you are an employee, or if you do not have diverse source of income, then employer who at any point in time can say "Don't do it, or this is your last thing you do as our employee" - they can have an upper hand on decision making of such an individual.
This is very basic thing - diversification of the source of your income. This is basic thing when you are investing money, but also this shoudl be - IMHO - one of the basic strategues to maintain your independence. Being able to quit any time is also a good one, and combining the two - being able to quit AND diversify - is an ultimate "I make my own decisions, for what I think is best for the project" safety net.
And yeah I will push a more detailed fixup for that soon.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651837078
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
That's the proposal:
<img width="928" height="841" alt="Screenshot 2025-12-29 at 22 54 29" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/05050391-cacb-4834-b9d9-4da62d8c4e55" />
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658944253
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
So why call it employment and not cooperation then ? I think it muddies the waters if we call it employment but think something else than employment is ok as well - and splitting that into separateemployment/other forms of contract does not seem to introduce too much of complexity ?
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
So why call it employment and not cooperation then ? I think it muddies the waters if we call it employment but think something else than employment is ok as well - and splitting that into separateemployment/other forms of contract does not seem to introduce too much of complexity ?
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
So why call it employment and not cooperation then ? I think it muddies the waters if we call it employment but think something else than employment is ok as well - and splitting that into separateemployment/other forms of contract does not seem to introduce too much of complexity ?
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
So why call it employment and not cooperation then ? I think it muddies the waters if we call it employment but think something else than employment is ok as well - and splitting that into separateemployment/other forms of contract does not seem to introduce too much of complexity ?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "chia7712 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
chia7712 commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2657482417
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> "While companies, cannot directly influence direction of the project, when you hire committers and PMC members, their incentives are naturally more aligned with your company goals".
I like the alignment angle. Just a nit: Starting a 'Benefits' section with a negative ('While companies cannot...') might be less appealing. How about we flip it to focus on the positive 'bridging' aspect first?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "bproffitt (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
bproffitt commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658060399
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
Sure, personal relationships are great, if you can find them/build them. But of far greater importance is _establishing_ connections between the project and a corporate contributor (base). This feels like you are advocating some sort of intermediary to broker such connections with projects. I can see the benefits in the short term, but this set of documents is to help companies build their own relationships using open source and community best practices.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658349808
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> But companies can directly influence the direction of a project.
I am not saying it's different. Quite the contrary. I am even proposing to explain how (by aligining incentives). What I am really telling that "influence the project" is ambiguous. And can be understood differently. There are quite a few projects that have more influence than what we want - maybe because we leave the "influence" up for interpretation. I think it should be clear that "people" have decision making power, where their decisions might be subject to having aligned incentives.
That leaves explicitly power for the people to decide, where companies might only do everything to make people incentivised, but not telling them what to do. I think being explicit is better than implicit here. Having explicit statement about it so that those people can simply send links to their employees - "look I am just following what ASF expects, and my decision is different than what you asked me to do" is very powerful for the individuals.
If we leave it as "influence", then the manager will be entitled to say "but ASF wrote that I can have influence, so they want you to follow what I tell you".
I think It's a chance to not be vague about it. But be very clear that we expect employees who contribute to ASF to make their own decisions. Just stating it at the page where we say "companies can have influence" does not seem a bad idea I think?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658331628
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
BTW2. If there were "nuanced" difference of employees vs. contractors - why do we have those two terms at all? Also - in most EU countries, the non-compete agreements are mandatory for employees. So basically when you are an employee - non-compete is basically "given" by the status of employment contracts (even if not specified in the contracts) - for contractors, it is solely question of agreement between parties.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658036690
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
Ah, ok, I see. I think that these sentiments are reflected in the #avoid-conflicts section, and in the #attract-collaborators sections. Let me know what you think.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649918694
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
Review Comment:
I think this chapter shold have few things that are "corporate speak" - mentioning direct savings companies might have by dedicating the peoople to open-source is crucial. Almost no company will be incentivised in investing in something that will make "industry better" - we need to find ways to explain it in terms of "direct savings" for those who are supposed to invest their money.
It is a very unappreciated effect of "being" in the open-source community, that you start to be respected by those who know most and can more eagerly share their knowledge. I have a great customer, that I work with for almost 4 years, and I literally saved weeks of their whole team's time by a weekly hour conversation with them. We need to make companies aware that their teams will be **far** more efficient if they will be respected by the community and recognised as contributors. It's not obvious, but very real in my opinion.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649929642
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
added a suggestion
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649953370
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
Yes, I believe this should be in employ.md
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "bproffitt (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
bproffitt commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658912629
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
Obviously there are different modes in which ICs can get paid to work with open source projects, but we need to remember the audience for this set of documents. My point was addressing "Employee (prety much always by definitiion) has a non-compete agreemeent and cannot cooperate with other stakeholders," which is one of the biggest problems I see when talking to companies about working with open source.
Going through every single permutation of how a company can interface with a project is, of course, a choice, but I believe it to be overkill. How an employee or a contractor interfaces with a project is the fundamentally the same for a company. There's just different legal structures setting up the rules. But that is just getting buried in the weeds.
We should be aiming this document to outline the greater principles of collaboration in open source, and the benefits of that collaboration, not trying to figure out all the tactical expressions of what that collaboration looks like.
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
Obviously there are different modes in which ICs can get paid to work with open source projects, but we need to remember the audience for this set of documents. My point was addressing "Employee (prety much always by definitiion) has a non-compete agreemeent and cannot cooperate with other stakeholders," which is one of the biggest problems I see when talking to companies about working with open source.
Going through every single permutation of how a company can interface with a project is, of course, a choice, but I believe it to be overkill. How an employee or a contractor interfaces with a project is the fundamentally the same for a company. There's just different legal structures setting up the rules. But that is just getting buried in the weeds.
We should be aiming this document to outline the greater principles of collaboration in open source, and the benefits of that collaboration, not trying to figure out all the tactical expressions of what that collaboration looks like.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2661811751
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
Yes. That's pretty much what I did. Thanks.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658331628
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
BTW2. If there were "nuanced" difference of employees vs. contractors - why do we have those two terms at all? Also - in most EU countries, some of the non-compete agreements are mandatory for employees. So basically when you are an employee - non-compete is basically "given" by the status of employment contracts (even if not specified in the contracts) - for contractors, it is solely question of agreement between parties.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658944253
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
So why call it employment and not cooperation then ? I think it muddies the waters if we call it employment but think something else than employment is ok as well - and splitting that into separate employment/other forms of contract does not seem to introduce too much of complexity ?
Employment and contractors are not permutting things - those are two legally distinct and recognized forms of cooperation - simply.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "chia7712 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
chia7712 commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2652164407
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
I think the introduction in `benefits.md` is a great place to explicitly mention the value of influence through merit.
How about tweaking the first paragraph like this?
> ...advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. Key among these is the ability to influence the project's trajectory through employees who have earned committer status. It's important to think strategically...
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651824962
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
A bit more explanation, long, but I hope it can clarify it:
Employee (prety much always by definitiion) has a non-compete agreemeent and cannot cooperate with other stakeholders. This is regular clause in employment contracts, and one that is even valid according to California Laws. The laws in California forbid Employers to restrict people to switch to competition, but it's standard (and kind of morally correct) to expect your employees to also cooperate - while they are employees - (and get some money from) with your direct competition. This is expected by all the laws about employment I saw. And main reasons I refused to be an employee of Astronomer for example.
When it comes to "supporting maintainers" rather than "employing them" - such "support maintainers" does not imply (and actually it makes no sense) to have a clause forbidding the maintainer to be supported by direct competition of the company that supports the maintainer.
I think there is a huge difference between the two - and one that makes individuals much more empowered in the whole process.
Like in my case - I am supported by Astronomer and Google - both pay me to be "maintainer". If I were an employee of either of those - that would be impossible to be paid by the other, because this violates the standard "non-compete" agreements. I could "work on Airflow" for free - but legally, i would not be able to be paid by the competitor. Not mentioning any other agreements I can have. Employment contract heavily limits usually who you can get paid from.
For me - personally - it gives a lot more freedom, flexibility and also independence - my sources of income come from several, independent stakeholders, legally allowed in the contracts I have, and I do not have to make my decisions taking into account "what happens if I loose my single income source". Not that I ever had to face that choice - actually, the fact that I have different stakeholders supporting me, this means that my decsion making process is far less influenced by it.
It's basically the same dillemma that ASF as an organisation forces (and any other Foundation). If they have a single source of income - no matter how hard you try, if you are not ready to quit "now", basically the one who holds your single source of income has a real impact on the decisions you make. This is why important point of ASF is either to always have a way out or to diversify the funding. Both are good strategies.
This is the same with individuals - yes, the commitership and PMC membership is with **you** - but if you are not ready to **quit** at any time without fear when you are an employee, or if you do not have diverse source of income, then employer who at any point in time can say "Don't do it, or this is your last thing you do as our employee" - they can have an upper hand on decision making of such an individual.
This is very basic thing - diversification of the source of your income. This is basic thing when you are investing money, but also this shoudl be - IMHO - one of the basic strategues to maintain your independence. Being able to quit any time is also a good one, and combining the two - being able to quit AND diversify - is an ultimate "I make my own decisions, for what I think is best for the project" safety net.
And yeah I will push a more detailed fixup for that soon.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2652713915
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> ...advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. Key among these is the ability to influence the project's trajectory through employees who have earned committer status. It's important to think strategically...
I personally think this is quite against the spirit of the ASF to suggest that this way. Wth the Apache Way, the whole idea is that individuals act on their own behalf, and with the direction of the project not being "skewed" unnecessarily by the fact that the company employs committers and PMC members.
Of course that's a bit of idealistic approach to think that employees interests are neglected by their employees - that would be insane to think tihs is happening. However I think in this case this work in a bit of a different direction (Ideally - according to how ASF model of influence on the project should work).
I think by employing committers and PMC members, what company achieves is not "influencing the trajectory" directly, but making PMC members and committers incentives more aligned with the company interests.
There is a subtle difference there - as a company management you should not be able to "tell" those PMC members what to approve and what to not approve, you can tell them what is the overall direction the company is going and let those PMC members and committers decide what they do - whether it aligns with this direction, or not.
I think "influence the trajectory" might be understood more of "tell employees what changes they should implement" - which of course happens, but it has nothing to do with "committer" status. What you implement and submit as a PR to the project (as employee) is logically different thing that what you "accept" as a PMC member as "committer". Your employee can tell you to "work on something" but it cannot tell you to "get something merged" - not formally and legally according to the ICLA every committer and PMC member signs.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Best practice for companies around ASF projects [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2699399010
##########
source/companies/employ.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+---
+title: Employing Open Source Contributors
+url: /companies/employ.html
+tags: ["companies", "employment", "contributors"]
+---
+
+# Employing Open Source Contributors
+
+If your business relies on an open source project, employing, or
+otherwise financially supporting,
+contributors to the project is the most effective way to ensure that
+your priorities are reflected in project decisions.
+(See also [Recruiting and Employee
+Satisfaction](/companies/benefits.html#recruiting-and-employee-satisfaction))
+
+This goes [far beyond code contributions](/contributors/non-code.html),
+although that is the most obvious and visible way that you can participate.
+
Review Comment:
Or - again let me repeat it - you might look for getting a maintainer on another type of contract, not employment.
For many companies, this is often a decision to make (and there is a significant difference):
* employ peipole
* contract with external people (software houses for example, or individual consultants)
This has very different properties - starting from non-compete (mentioned), going through much more flexible part-time or even hourly-based or task-based contract models.
In case of contracting non-employees - for example - companies might even use 3rd-parties (such as Tidelift, HeroDev and many similar) to setup those relationships - and this is **not** employment - in very strict legal sense of it. And it actually might help to solve the "how do companies find those people" - because they can do that through those third parties (and many already do).
Employment has very concrete definition and a lot of limitations that other forms of contract can be much more flexible.
I would strongly advocate for making it clear that "employment" is not the only way companies might make maintainers get money - and I am not really sure why this seems to be a controversial thing to add those form of contracts explicitly (it seems pretty obvious - both, that is happening already and that is very distinct from employment).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Best practice for companies around ASF projects [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen merged PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "bproffitt (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
bproffitt commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2657850847
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
This is not universally true. Some companies have explicit permission to participate in any open source project, regardless of who is participating (competitor or not).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658308935
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
> This is not universally true. Some companies have explicit permission to participate in any open source project, regardless of who is participating (competitor or not).
It's not about participating in open-source projects but about being paid by competition. I can't imagine an employment contract where it's ok, where competitor of your employee allows you to be paid by their competitor. This is pretty much always forbidden.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658331628
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
(BTW. If there were "nuanced" difference of employees vs. contractors - why do we have those two terms at all?)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658946343
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
We could also simply rename this chapter/page to 'employment and other forms of cooperation' and add a paragraph or two in the detailed page to explain the difference.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "hen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
hen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658444759
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Why your company should participate in ASF projects
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software,
+and **ASF projects are everywhere**.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and **influence the direction of these projects** for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant
+strategic and operational benefits to companies, including talent
+acquisition, influence over industry standards, strong company
+partnerships, and greater customer trust.<br />
+[[Read more ...](/companies/benefits.html)]
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
Review Comment:
Would love to see a different title used here as employing contributors directly has many issues.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658477905
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Why your company should participate in ASF projects
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software,
+and **ASF projects are everywhere**.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and **influence the direction of these projects** for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant
+strategic and operational benefits to companies, including talent
+acquisition, influence over industry standards, strong company
+partnerships, and greater customer trust.<br />
+[[Read more ...](/companies/benefits.html)]
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
Review Comment:
> Would love to see a different title used here as employing contributors directly has many issues.
I do think we **should** mention employment as one of the options (contracting and sponsoring individuals as well) - becaue it's the fact and even welcome that many contributors, committers, PMC members are employees. This is a good thing - for example one that allows Airflow to thrive (amongst other things). But I think we should just be explicit about boundaries of the influence - this is what I wanted to clarify how much influence companies might have (see my "aligining incentives" proposal).
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658015799
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
But companies *can* directly influence the direction of a project. That's something that we actively solicit, and should optimize for. I'm not a big fan of pretending that's not the case. It leads to pretty actively confusing companies. We ask them to participate, and scold them when they do. This entire set of documents is *explicitly* intended to combat that.
(Other remarks here seem to be about previous versions of this doc that no longer survive, so I'm not sure what they're in reference to. Perhaps another pass is warranted?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651824962
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
A bit more explanation, long, but I hope it can clarify it:
Employee (prety much always by definitiion) has a non-compete agreemeent and cannot cooperate with other stakeholders. This is regular clause in employment contracts, and one that is even valid according to California Laws. The laws in California forbid Employers to restrict people to switch to competition, but it's standard (and kind of morally correct) to expect your employees to also cooperate - while they are employees - (and get some money from) with your direct competition. This is expected by all the laws about employment I saw. And main reasons I refused to be an employee of Astronomer for example.
When it comes to "supporting maintainers" rather than "employing them" - such "support maintainers" does not imply (and actually it makes no sense) to have a clause forbidding the maintainer to be supported by direct competition of the company that supports the maintainer.
I think there is a huge difference between the two - and one that makes individuals much more empowered in the whole process.
Like in my case - I am supported by Astronomer and Google - both pay me to be "maintainer". If I were an employee of either of those - that would be impossible to be paid by the other, because this violates the standard "non-compete" agreements. I could "work on Airflow" for free - but legally, i would not be able to be paid by the competitor. Not mentioning any other agreements I can have. Employment contract heavily limits usually who you can get paid from.
For me - personally - it gives a lot more freedom, flexibility and also independence - my sources of income come from several, independent stakeholders, legally allowed in the contracts I have, and I do not have to make my decisions making to account "what happens if I loose my single income source". Not that I ever had to face that choice - actually, the fact that I have different stakeholders supporting me, this means that my decsion making process is far less influenced by it.
It's basically the same dillemma that ASF as an organisation forces (and any other Foundation). If they have a single source of income - no matter how hard you try, if you are not ready to quit "now", basically the one who holds your single source of income has a real impact on the decisions you make. This is why important point of ASF is either to always have a way out or to diversify the funding. Both are good strategies.
This is the same with individuals - yes, the commitership and PMC membership is with **you** - but if you are not ready to **quit** at any time without fear when you are an employee, or if you do not have diverse source of income, then employer who at any point in time can say "Don't do it, or this is your last thing you do as our employee" - they can have an upper hand on decision making of such an individual.
This is very basic thing - diversification of the source of your income. This is basic thing when you are investing money, but also this shoudl be - IMHO - one of the basic strategues to maintain your independence. Being able to quit any time is also a good one, and combining the two - being able to quit AND diversify - is an ultimate "I make my own decisions, for what I think is best for the project" safety net.
And yeah I will push a more detailed fixup for that soon.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651835169
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
> What change are you suggesting here?
I already did -> I moved all the changes above to "benefits.md" Those are the suggestions I proposed - adding two more paragraphs under the original one which focused on the "long-term" benefits. The two paragraphs I proposed are focusing more on the short-term benefits and actual ways companies migh save money in shorter term (making their teams more productive)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Best practice for companies around ASF projects [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2699505367
##########
source/companies/employ.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
+---
+title: Employing Open Source Contributors
+url: /companies/employ.html
+tags: ["companies", "employment", "contributors"]
+---
+
+# Employing Open Source Contributors
+
+If your business relies on an open source project, employing, or
+otherwise financially supporting,
+contributors to the project is the most effective way to ensure that
+your priorities are reflected in project decisions.
+(See also [Recruiting and Employee
+Satisfaction](/companies/benefits.html#recruiting-and-employee-satisfaction))
+
+This goes [far beyond code contributions](/contributors/non-code.html),
+although that is the most obvious and visible way that you can participate.
+
+Think of staffing an open source project exactly the same way you would
+think about staffing an internal software development project. What
+positions would you staff if you weren't sharing the load with the
+community? Are those positions being adequately covered?
+
+Dedicating employee time to positions like marketing, events, and
Review Comment:
```suggestion
Dedicating employee or contractors time to positions like marketing, events, and
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2657042847
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
I think it's a bit too detailed of a description that has no "i instantly understand it" vibe. I think this is what @rbowen also wants to achieve here (that's my understanding) that the message is "short" and "easy to grasp" even by somoene who does not understand how Open source works in detail - so this should be rather on a "slogan" side of things.
So in a sense "influence project trajectory" is a good "slogan" - even if ti can be a little too much crossing the "line" that ASF puts on the project decision making.
I would rather formulate it in a way that is positive, but also asserively sets the boundaries and is very "open" about communicating ASF position. For example:
**"While companies, cannot directly influence direction of the project, when you hire committers and PMC members, their incentives are naturally more aligned with your company goals".**
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2658308935
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
> This is not universally true. Some companies have explicit permission to participate in any open source project, regardless of who is participating (competitor or not).
It's not about participating in open-source projects but about being paid by competition. I can't imagine an employment contract where it's ok, where competitor of your employer allows you to be paid by their competitor. This is pretty much always forbidden.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rbowen (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rbowen commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651793452
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will participate and measure impact. It can be challenging to justify these benefits to management, as many of them are long-term. And these benefits will vary greatly depending on the nature of your business.
+
Review Comment:
What change are you suggesting here?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2651824962
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
A bit more explanation, long, but I hope it can clarify it:
Employee (prety much always by definitiion) has a non-compete agreemeent and cannot cooperate with other stakeholders. This is regular clause in employment contracts, and one that is even valid according to California Laws. The laws in California forbid Employers to restrict people to switch to competition, but it's standard (and kind of morally correct) to expect your employees to also cooperate - while they are employees - (and get some money from) with your direct competition. This is expected by all the laws about employment I saw. And main reasons I refused to be an employee of Astronomer for example.
When it comes to "supporting maintainers" rather than "employing them" - such "support maintainers" does not imply (and actually it makes no sense) to have a clause forbidding the maintainer to be supported by direct competition.
I think there is a huge difference between the two - and one that makes individuals much more empowered in the whole process.
Like in my case - I am supported by Astronomer and Google - both pay me to be "maintainer". If I were an employee of either of those - that would be impossible to be paid by the other, because this violates the standard "non-compete" agreements. I could "work on Airflow" for free - but legally, i would not be able to be paid by the competitor. Not mentioning any other agreements I can have. Employment contract heavily limits usually who you can get paid from.
For me - personally - it gives a lot more freedom, flexibility and also independence - my sources of income come from several, independent stakeholders, legally allowed in the contracts I have, and I do not have to make my decisions taking into account "what happens if I loose my single income source". Not that I ever had to face that choice - actually, the fact that I have different stakeholders supporting me, this means that my decsion making process is far less influenced by it.
It's basically the same dillemma that ASF as an organisation forces (and any other Foundation). If they have a single source of income - no matter how hard you try, if you are not ready to quit "now", basically the one who holds your single source of income has a real impact on the decisions you make. This is why important point of ASF is either to always have a way out or to diversify the funding. Both are good strategies.
This is the same with individuals - yes, the commitership and PMC membership is with **you** - but if you are not ready to **quit** at any time without fear when you are an employee, or if you do not have diverse source of income, then employer who at any point in time can say "Don't do it, or this is your last thing you do as our employee" - they can have an upper hand on decision making of such an individual.
This is very basic thing - diversification of the source of your income. This is basic thing when you are investing money, but also this shoudl be - IMHO - one of the basic strategues to maintain your independence. Being able to quit any time is also a good one, and combining the two - being able to quit AND diversify - is an ultimate "I make my own decisions, for what I think is best for the project" safety net.
And yeah I will push a more detailed fixup for that soon.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2662015621
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
(note I was talking about renaming the chapter/ page not about updating the paragraph - that's not the same actually)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649959305
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
+
+
+## Ways to contribute
+
+There are three primary ways that companies can engage with ASF
+projects. Each has costs and benefits that should be carefully
+considered.
+
+<div class="row">
+ <!-- Employ -->
+ <div class="col-md-4">
+
+### [Employ Contributors](/companies/employ.html)
+
+[](/companies/employ.html)
+
+The most impactful way companies support open source is by employing developers and other professionals who contribute to projects. This includes not just code contributions, but documentation, community management, testing, design, and advocacy work.
+ </div><!-- End Employ -->
+
Review Comment:
How about separate one (support.md) ? For me employment is **completely** different than "supporting maintiainers" who are not employees. For one employment practically excludes being supported simultaneously by competitors, while supporting maintiners does not. I would like to expand on that -and explain the difference in more datail.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2652713915
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> ...advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. Key among these is the ability to influence the project's trajectory through employees who have earned committer status. It's important to think strategically...
I personally think this is quite against the spirit of the ASF to suggest that this way. Wth the Apache Way, the whole idea is that individuals act on their own behalf, and with the direction of the project not being "skewed" unnecessarily by the fact that the company employs committers and PMC members.
Of course that's a bit of idealistic approach to think that employees interests are neglected by their employees - that would be insane to think tihs is happening. However I think in this case this work in a bit of a different direction (Ideally - according to how ASF model of influence on the project should work).
I think by employing committers and PMC members, what company achieves is not "influencing the trajectory" directly, but making PMC members and committers incentives more aligned with the company interests.
There is a subtle difference there - as a company management you should not be able to "tell" those PMC members what to approve and what to not approve, you can tell them what is the overall direction the company is going and let those PMC members and committers decide what they do - whether it aligns with this direction, or not.
I think "influence the trajectory" might be understood more of "tell employees what changes they should implement and release" - which of course happens. But it has nothing to do with what "committer" status gives. Committers can "approve" things. Anyone can implement them. What you implement and submit as a PR to the project (as employee) is logically different thing that what you "accept" as a "committer". Your employee can tell you to "work on something" but it cannot tell you to "get something merged" - not formally and legally according to the ICLA every committer and PMC member signs.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2652713915
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
Review Comment:
> ...advantages that extend far beyond cost savings. Key among these is the ability to influence the project's trajectory through employees who have earned committer status. It's important to think strategically...
I personally think this is quite against the spirit of the ASF to suggest that this way. Wth the Apache Way, the whole idea is that individuals act on their own behalf, and with the direction of the project not being "skewed" unnecessarily by the fact that the company employs committers and PMC members.
Of course that's a bit of idealistic approach to think that employees interests are neglected by their employees - that would be insane to think tihs is happening. However I think in this case this work in a bit of a different direction (Ideally - according to how ASF model of influence on the project should work).
I think by employing committers and PMC members, what company achieves is not "influencing the trajectory" directly, but making PMC members and committers incentives more aligned with the company interests.
There is a subtle difference there - as a company management you should not be able to "tell" those PMC members what to approve and what to not approve, you can tell them what is the overall direction the company is going and let those PMC members and committers decide what they do - whether it aligns with this direction, or not.
I think "influence the trajectory" might be understood more of "tell employees what changes they should implement and release" - which of course happens, but it has nothing to do with "committer" status. What you implement and submit as a PR to the project (as employee) is logically different thing that what you "accept" as a PMC member as "committer". Your employee can tell you to "work on something" but it cannot tell you to "get something merged" - not formally and legally according to the ICLA every committer and PMC member signs.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "potiuk (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
potiuk commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2649910351
##########
source/companies/_index.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+title: Companies and Open Source
+url: /companies/
+tags: ["companies", "business", "navigation"]
+---
+
+# Companies and Open Source
+
+All modern digital infrastructure is dependent on open source software.
+Companies must think strategically about how they will engage with the
+open source projects on which they rely in order to ensure
+sustainability, and influence the direction of these projects for the
+benefit of their customers.
+
+## [Benefits to Companies](/companies/benefits.html)
+
+Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
Review Comment:
```suggestion
Active participation in open source projects provides significant strategic and operational benefits to companies, from talent acquisition to technology innovation and market positioning.
Such cooperation works in both directions - when maintainers see company that is actively participating in the project, they are eager to help and solve problems that individuals from the company are raising.
Personal relationships with maintainers also makes it possible to save even weeks of going in a wrong direction in your deployments, because maintainers will know your context and will be able to help to make better decisions.
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Zeroth draft of a /companies section. [comdev-site]
Posted by "rich7420 (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rich7420 commented on code in PR #216:
URL: https://github.com/apache/comdev-site/pull/216#discussion_r2652624866
##########
source/companies/advocacy.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+---
+title: Open Source Advocacy
+url: /companies/advocacy.html
+tags: ["companies", "advocacy", "branding"]
+---
+
+# Open Source Advocacy
+
+Advocating for ASF projects, while respecting the project's independence
+and honoring the project's brands, can significantly drive adoption of
+the project, which can advance your own company's business
Review Comment:
```suggestion
the project, which can advance your own company's business.
```
##########
source/companies/benefits.md:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+title: Benefits of Open Source Participation
+url: /companies/benefits.html
+tags: ["companies", "benefits", "business value"]
+---
+
+# Benefits of ASF Participation
+
+Companies that actively participate in ASF projects realize significant
+strategic and operational advantages that extend far beyond cost savings.
+It's important to think strategically about how, where, and why you will
+participate and measure impact.
+
+## Influence the roadmap
+
+While it can sometimes take months, or years, to gain expertise and
+trust in an established community, showing up to do the daily
+project maintenance -- issue and PR triage; reviewing PRs; planning and
+executing community events; answering user questions -- you'll quickly
+begin to establish that you can be trusted, which will make it easier
+for you to influence the direction of the project.
+
+Decisions about the direction of Apache projects are made by the people
+who show up to participate in the conversation. If you don't join the
+conversation, then your competitors will decide how tomorrow's
+technology will shape up.
+
+Make sure someone on your team is reading the project [mailing
+lists](https://www.apache.org/foundation/mailinglists.html) every day,
+and advocating for your priorities. That's what community means --
+showing up to own the future of the project.
+
+While trust does not necessarily transfer to other employees, over time,
+as project participants see your company actively contributing to the
+project, and demonstrating ownership, they'll be more willing to work
+with you.
+
+## Recruiting
+
+By working upstream on projects, you directly showcase to potential
+employees what they might be working on. This helps attract the right
+kind of talent to work on your priorities, and they'll begin to see your
+company as a partner in the project, and an attractive place to work.
+
+Being involved in the day-to-day life of the project
+gives you direct access to the most qualified people in the world to
+work on your team. And you know they'll be arriving with the skills you
+need.
+
+## Business and Strategic Advantages
+
+For more than 25 years, the ASF has been a place where industry
+standards have been set and implemented. Collaborating in those
+projects is the most effective way to shape industry standards and best
+practices. You'll be building trust with current and potential
+customers, and building strategic partnerships with other companies
+working in the same space.
+
+And by collaborating with your peers on the common tasks, you'll be able
+to better focus on what is your unique business differentiators.
Review Comment:
```suggestion
to better focus on your unique business differentiators.
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org