When I was working on @babeljs, the jQuery Foundation were interested in taking on the project. Then it became the JS Foundation, and now the Node.js Foundation...? I wouldn't feel very good as a project participant with being thrown around like that.
-
-
Your assumption here is that the projects are deeply impacted by the structural changes of these foundations. Ideally, they aren't. I can only speak well to the Node.js Foundation structure, but the project has a great degree of autonomy from the Foundation.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy about the announcement and trust the Node Foundation way more than any other. I'm just wondering how the project maintainers feel. Their projects are legally owned by the foundation, right? Any foundation merging means a transfer for legal ownership?
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Trademark's and other property (domains) are owned by the Foundation. Copyright is not, it's owned by the contributors. and governance belongs to the projects, usually with a charter in the bylaws or passed immediately by the board after formation. Maintainers own projects.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
JS Foundation requires signing a CLA, though. So there’s some ownership there.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
ya, I have a long history of arguing against CLAs. the Node.js Foundation doesn't use them as is the same for most Linux Foundation projects. the LF tends to prefer the DCO.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.