[mgse]

Related to "Hire open source hackers", I'd like to work for a company that respects, and dare I say encourages, open source contributions.

I recently went through the approval process to contribute to a project on my own time. Due to its nature, the project obviously would not conflict with my business unit or any business unit within the company. Approval should have been a 5 minute conversation with my manager.

Instead, I had to write up a proposal for the open source review board. After a week or so, they agreed it was acceptable. The next step was to fill out a form and get a VP to manually sign it. This took a bit of time since the VP is 4 levels up and was, unsurprisingly, out of the country.

That experience will affect my next job search.

[derefr]

I would take that further: I want to work for a company where you need a form from the VP to allow any work in the company to go un-open-sourced. Everything is MIT-licensed and posted to Github by default. Only the secret-est of secret sauce gets redacted.

[law]

Why not GPLv3?

[ericclemmons]

I'm the VP of Software Development at my company, and as long as what we open source isn't advantageous specifically to competitors or required significant resources to produce, it's all gravy.

So far, nothing has been vetoed. We use tons of NodeJS and PHP frameworks/libraries, so contributing and open-sourcing is part of why we enjoy our job so much :)

[mfenniak]

Ouch. I think I would've quit that job when I found out there was an "open source review board". That reeks of bureaucracy.

[rosser]

Instead, you'd just let an engineer grab some AGPL code and use it in your web stack without considering the implications? I've seen it happen, and the engineer in question didn't understand why — or even that — it was a problem.

Sure, it's a little process-y, but it's not there just to check boxes on forms.