3 ms·
At my former company there was a three step process for contributing to open source: - get approval from VP to spend time on that - get approval from legal (t
by isbvhodnvemrwvn 6y ago
At my former company there was a three step process for contributing to open source:
- get approval from VP to spend time on that
- get approval from legal (they checked the license and if the company has any liability from that code not working, this alone took a couple months)
- get approval for release of code from a so called open-source committee (basically checked if your contribution doesn't damage company's reputation)
It was easier to set up a fake account and get things fixed this way. But no way I could do that on company hardware or time.
- pbhjpbhj 6y agoWe're talking about contributions in one's own time, outside of work and not using their resources??
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 6y agoAre we? > I will still think odd that’s someone who is a professional hasn’t found one bug in an open source lib that is worth a PR or even an issue in a decade of work. It seems like the person is surprised how nobody has any contributions from just their professional work. Naturally unless I had no life outside of programming I would spend the vast majority of my time doing my 9-5 stuff.
- tapland 6y agoNot allowed everywhere. Any code I write ay any point of time is owned by my employer legally and in an EU country. This is because I work at a large consulting company that touches on any and all business fields. Free Github private repos has been a blessing for just storing modifications to existing projects.
- anonymousab 6y agoIn NA, it's common for software dev. employment contracts to prevent you from working on software in your own time, and/or to claim moral rights to anything you do work on, regardless of field or business interest overlap. I have no idea about enforcement, and most coworkers I've had have ignored those clauses.