2B or not to be?

[davidc]

The better question might be what is to be? Before I say anything
else I want to state that I am very optomistic about the CPF coming to
be. I am not for or against any one schema for development or
products/projects related to them (include any acronym you wish
here). All depending on what I am working on at any given time I use
what works for the situation at hand. I like things in Unix, Linux,
and Windows. I really think that CPF is cultivating a good thing for
all developers in every arena on a global scale. I admire the fact
that they are attempting to build bridges between those arenas within
the varying facets of project development cycles.

I do have a few concerns though. I am not versed in legal matters
though I do enjoy cranking out code on my own time. Still yet when I
see a single step process for submitting for participation I
hesitate. Granted I can see where others may do a double take for
various reasons that drag out the percieved past of MS or might even
be tempted to pick through all the stipulations within the jargon. I
hesitate for a different reason though. Maybe I am missing something
somewhere, but the question that came to my mind to cause my
hesitation is "Why isn't there a criteria to the application
process?" My logic behind this is that if I am understanding
correctly CPF is going to be bridging the gaps mentioned above. What
I am hearing is the difference between CPF and other models being used
out there is CPF will involve specificity for projects and tools
needed for builders/developers to build/create these projects that
span all the different terrains allowing the developer to move freely
from one side of the bridge to the other. Please correct me if I am
wrong here, but being that the developers are stakeholders in this
picture and the need for the specificity for them to traverse those
spans is more obvious now, isn't there more to this than one step to
participate? I am not seeing where CPF is identifying the specific
needs of varied types of projects. Maybe this is being looked into and
at any rate I will wait patiently to see.

My next thing is a concern with commercial vs. other(include any
nomeclature here). If a solo developer or small team is in their own
silo and not in some commercial think tank...yet the individual or
small team is working with technology/program language/s that could
work in a productive way with the commercial products... shouldn't
there be some sort of process for the development cycle that takes the
varying aspects/variables into consideration again? Maybe, and this
is just a suggestion, maybe just maybe some sort of a incubation
process could be in order here. Something where all parties interests
are protected. This way the individual doesn't end up out there like
a target for the larger organizations involved to tear to pieces just
because they have a high paid attorney in their back pocket. But on a
positve note a defined incubation process could allow for things like
testing/review periods with approvals and dissaproval options,
sensitivity towards protecting one party against the other, and high-
level quality assurances for end products for all parties involved,

Being a realist and common sensical, I for one am in no position to
lose my day job (who is for that matter is in this economy). Two,
that risk is something I would have to be willing to take, but I don't
want the short end of the stick after having already handed over my
code. Thirdly, heaven forbid that I should ever want any organization
coming after me with pitchforks in hand ready to nail me up on a wall
just because I am working on something newer or involves one of their
competitors in the corporate world. Even if it is something that the
masses could use on a large scale.

I know that this first 100 days is a period of when things are getting
settled in and not all the solutions have been hammered out yet. I
guess I am just anxious and very enthusiastic about it all. I would
like to see the variables declared with a little more detail though.
Being that it is still a little unclear as to how what is going 2B
will be I will watch with interest for now.

I just noticed this doesn't have a spellcheck so please overlook the
typos and excuse the lengthiness. I couldn't sleep and I had to get
all that out, maybe now I can catch a few ZZZZZ.

[davidc]

I am just adding a few comments to what I stated below.

I guess I have a high expectation that CPF is going to be on a
different level and the projects they are going to participate/help
support isn't going to be like others where you can see X million
different versions of a chat client project. I am hoping it is going
to have more granularity than other places so CPF can direct more
resouces to the project I am working on instead of thinning out all
their resources for X million versions of some chat client. Maybe
that sounds selfish, but I hope that the developers are going to get
that sort of focus.

>
> My next thing is a concern with commercial vs. other(include any
> nomeclature here).  If a solo developer or small team is in their own
> silo and not in some commercial think tank...yet the individual or
> small team is working with technology/program language/s that could
> work in a productive way with the commercial products... shouldn't
> there be some sort of process for the development cycle that takes the
> varying aspects/variables into consideration again?  Maybe, and this
> is just a suggestion, maybe just maybe some sort of a incubation
> process could be in order here.  Something where all parties interests
> are protected.  This way the individual doesn't end up out there like
> a target for the larger organizations involved to tear to pieces just
> because they have a high paid attorney in their back pocket.  But on a
> positve note a defined incubation process could allow for things like
> testing/review periods with approvals and dissaproval options,
> sensitivity towards protecting one party against the other, and high-

> level quality assurances for end products for all parties involved.

Just adding it could allow for controlled releases also if they are
needed. I say this because some projects may need in-depth testing
before releasing to the public whereas something like the X millionth
irc chat client project may not.

>
> Being a realist and common sensical, I for one am in no position to
> lose my day job (who is for that matter is in this economy).  Two,
> that risk is something I would have to be willing to take, but I don't
> want the short end of the stick after having already handed over my
> code.  Thirdly, heaven forbid that I should ever want any organization
> coming after me with pitchforks in hand ready to nail me up on a wall
> just because I am working on something newer or involves one of their
> competitors in the corporate world.  Even if it is something that the
> masses could use on a large scale.
>
> I know that this first 100 days is a period of when things are getting
> settled in and not all the solutions have been hammered out yet.  I
> guess I am just anxious and very enthusiastic about it all.  I would
> like to see the variables declared with a little more detail though.
> Being that it is still a little unclear as to how what is going 2B
> will be I will watch with interest for now.

I didn't mean for this to sound harsh giving the fact CPF is still in
labor giving birth to this baby (no offense to the ladies out there).
I just want to throw that out there.