spec review


Jilayne Lovejoy <Jilayne.Lovejoy@...>
 

Hi All,

Apologies I could not make the call this morning, but I have reviewed Mark’s summaries of discussion/responses on the public comments page and looks like most items were sensibly resolved.  I have no further comments, with the exception of #19 which was marked as TBD

I still think that the current definition of Supplied Software needs to be tweaked so as not to catch in it software that a company provides as its own OSS project.  Perhaps a simple changes as follows would work:

currently: "Supplied Software – software that an organization delivers to third parties (e.g., other organizations or individuals).”

Change to:  "Supplied Software – software that an organization delivers to third parties (e.g., other organizations or individuals), with the exception of software provided publicly as open source software under an open source license.”

Thanks,
Jilayne

Principal Open Source Counsel
ARM  |  www.arm.com
jilayne.lovejoy@... |  +1-720-412-9472
Skype: lovejoylids | Twitter: @jilaynelovejoy
Location (usually): Boulder, Colorado



IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.


Mark Gisi
 

Hi Jilayne,

 

Sorry for the delayed response. Thanks for all the helpful feedback you provided.

 

We discussed the point that the definition for Supplied Software might be viewed as extending to an organizations’ s contributions - which was considered to be a good thing. That is, one contribution’s represent a form of Supplied Software. That is one’s software delivered under an open source license very much is a distribution to a third party (everyone). That one would expect that it is a good practice for the distributor of their own contributions to be compliant. The discussion concluded with the action to see if we can make it more clear in the next version -> that contributions are in fact also Supplied Software and the same discipline should be applied.

 

All in all, your comment encourage the broadening of  the Supplied Software definition.

 

- Mark

 

 

 

 

From: Jilayne Lovejoy [mailto:Jilayne.Lovejoy@...]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 6:49 PM
To: openchain@...
Cc: Gisi, Mark
Subject: spec review

 

Hi All,

 

Apologies I could not make the call this morning, but I have reviewed Mark’s summaries of discussion/responses on the public comments page and looks like most items were sensibly resolved.  I have no further comments, with the exception of #19 which was marked as TBD

 

I still think that the current definition of Supplied Software needs to be tweaked so as not to catch in it software that a company provides as its own OSS project.  Perhaps a simple changes as follows would work:

 

currently: "Supplied Software – software that an organization delivers to third parties (e.g., other organizations or individuals).”

 

Change to:  "Supplied Software – software that an organization delivers to third parties (e.g., other organizations or individuals), with the exception of software provided publicly as open source software under an open source license.”

 

Thanks,

Jilayne

 

Principal Open Source Counsel

ARM  |  www.arm.com

jilayne.lovejoy@... |  +1-720-412-9472

Skype: lovejoylids | Twitter: @jilaynelovejoy

Location (usually): Boulder, Colorado

 

 

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.