- From: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 16:18:03 +0000
- To: Daniel Smith <opened.to@gmail.com>
- CC: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
On 8/15/12 4:46 PM, "Daniel Smith" <opened.to@gmail.com> wrote: >Just my 2 cents, but there was a discussion just the other day on w3 >egov list regarding >the use of other variations of conferencing than just phone, such as >podcasts, join.me or google+. > >The upshot of it was as follows: >"Podcasts and recordings enter into a different category because they >require legal releases by participants. This would be hard for >participants, often with government affiliations, to support. Thus, >W3C hasn't offered this for interest & working group discussions." > >When I looked into GitHub, though it often is looked upon as (and it >is) very beneficial to open source etc, it also has very heavy >economic and financial consideration going forward. They recently, >just a month or so ago, received 100 million in funding: >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub > >Similar to the recording releases mentioned above, you may wish to >seriously consider the contractual rights, alliance etc ramifications >of w3 going to github, and other possible corporate ties they have or >had. It would almost seem like a w3/GH merger to me. I'm sure W3C has selected other service providers to cater for it's different needs and no one has considered those a "merger". GitHub is a service provider that provides excellent tooling and high visibility at no costs to W3C while allowing W3C to keep mirroring it's repositories whichever way it wants and lets everyone us the service using a completely free OS tool: git. That's all there is to it. Full disclosure: I've met the founders on varying occasions. --tobie
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2012 16:18:36 UTC