We invite you to participate in the Progress Common Component Specification (CCS) Project.
Today, the transformation of Progress® OpenEdge® applications is happening globally through a large number of application frameworks. At the same time, every modern business application needs common functionality such as security, configuration, session management, and more.
That’s where the CCS Project comes in. Its goal is to develop a standard set of specifications for various common components needed by the OpenEdge community to build the best business applications.
Standard specifications for common components will enable OpenEdge partners and customers to choose from components available throughout the OpenEdge community.
The CCS Project will also enable the OpenEdge community to pool its resources and build high-productivity tools that can work across multiple application frameworks. We expect Common Component Specifications will help deliver true application flexibility, and will unlock future development possibilities for OpenEdge partners and customers.
By participating in the CCS Project, you will:
So please consider joining your peers in this new Progress community endeavor. To apply to participate in the Common Component Specification Project, visit Progress Community. Once you have been accepted, you’ll have access to the full CSC Community site and can begin interacting with other OpenEdge community members, architects, developers and the Progress development team.
We look forward to your involvement in the Common Component Specification Project. If you have any questions, please email us at ccs-applications@progress.com
Kind regards,
Sunil Belgaonkar
Director of OpenEdge Strategy
Progress
Allas as a contractor I do not have enough interest in participating. It should have been a paid job for me. ;-)
But good luck with the project!
Sorry to post it here, I see no ideas-basket for this project. But I would appreciate an eclipse erd-plugin. There is an open-source project that I can recommend tom participate in: ERMaster. See ermaster.sourceforge.net ) - See more at: community.progress.com/.../next_gen_database.aspx
Could be the start of a next-gen star-spangled oe database. ;-)
[quote user="agent_008_nl"]
Allas as a contractor I do not have enough interest in participating.
[/quote]
So you have no interest in ensuring that your web framework can interact with other framework components?
Sure, but not a commercial interest. I have to earn some money and I'm afraid participating will cost me a lot of unbillable hours. Although I could expect to learn a lot also of course.
Yet Another Type Of License Agreement ,
* is there an executive summary I can send to my boss ?
* is it similar to an existing license
As far as I understand it after a quick read PSC gets all rights to distribute the resulting code but I can't find what rights participants get in using the code in their product. Will we be needing a license from PSC to use code that we submitted ?
I don't think you are expected to submit code, but maybe I read even faster. I hate the NDA in any case and would like to see open discussions *here*.
What is this? In a time where Microsoft puts tons of code in Github, Progress decides to start a private project.
Why do I have to answer so many questions to become a participant (my revenue?....)
Why not start a decent Github project.... Sorry i don't get this.
The provision of information about my employer is what has put me off registering for this. It shouldn't matter surely?
> I don't think you are expected to submit code
Section 2.b "Contribution" shall mean any original work of authorship (present and future contributions of object code, source code, documentation and other materials)
Section 3.c. The licenses granted in Sections 3.a. and 3.b. above are effective on the date the Contributor submits (as defined in Section 2.b.) the Contributions to PSC or to the Project.
As I read it you loose all rights to whatever you submit to this program, and if you're lucky PSC will give (sell?) you a license to the resulting code. If you're unlucky they don't include your contribution but they still hold the rights.
I don't know who is already on the program or what's in it , and because of the NDA, those who are can't tell me
Specifications work better when there is code to demonstrate how they're used. Nobody's forcing you to submit code though.
And if you look at the license on the "release" side of the project, community.progress.com/.../releaselicenseagreement.aspx, you'll see the terms PSC is using to pass the code and spec to the community. In order to do that, they need to obtain the license rights from the submitters, and that is why a "you give us all these rights" on the submission side is needed.
Hi Tim,
That bring me back to my initial question :
Is there an executive summary of the set of agreements I can send to my boss ?
On the one hand I read that you get a lot of rights to use the released specs/code/... on the other hand there is a NDA involved
The initiative looks interesting but the legal documents involved mean that the decision whether I try to join or not are not mine to make.
Note that, I believe, the target of this project is not code, but specifications. I.e., if one can publish the CCS Specifications for a Security module, then multiple people can create products that match those specifications and make them available on whatever terms they want - licensed or restricted or open source. The user can be confident what the component will be able to do and can shop among multiple such components for the one they like the most.
This may suit for an "Exec summary:
community.progress.com/.../commoncomponentcharter.aspx
The contributor license isn't that long - you could read it and make your own summary.
community.progress.com/.../contributorlicenseagreement.aspx
Looking at the NDA - community.progress.com/.../nondisclosureagreement.aspx I'm not sure what "confidential information" it would cover - unless that's the discussion of the various specification committees while a spec is "in progress."
[quote user="Thomas Mercer-Hursh"]
I.e., if one can publish the CCS Specifications for a Security module, then multiple people can create products that match those specifications and make them available on whatever terms they want - licensed or restricted or open source. The user can be confident what the component will be able to do and can shop among multiple such components for the one they like the most.[/quote]
This was exactly the idea as Sunil presented it at PCA 2015.
You can bring him the executive summary, however my suspicion is will still the attorney's to sign off for you to participate. In very short wording, by signing on you give PSC and other community members the rights to redistribute royalty free the contributions you and your company make to these efforts.
But, is the contribution giving shape to specifications, which seems to mutual benefit and unlikely to impinge much on IP or is it software the implements those specifications, which is a different matter. It would be nice for people to illustrate points without actual software without those illustrations becoming a part of the distributed product.
Hello all,
As a few of you have asked, in developer words, I would like to summarize different agreements/contracts that CCS Application process needs you to sign and agree to --
I am hopeful that this provides a decent summary to get you started.
Please be aware that this summary is NOT intended to be replacement for you and/or your organization reading, understanding the implications of and agreeing to all the contract/ agreement terms and conditions in the CCS application. For any confusion and clarification, please refer and rely on the actual CCS agreements.
Thanks
Sunil
Why all these abbreviations (CSS, PI)? We have quite enough of them by now and these are there to be quickly forgotten. I know it is en vogue to introduce them exuberantly and it makes an intellectual impression, but for me ICT, XML, JSON and a couple of others are more than enough.
I'm trying to attribute a couple of ideas, but I'm only doing it in on communities and not in dark rooms. I do not have the idea that what I put together is so unique and special that I want to make what I stole together My Intellectual Property (MIP). Psc (ok, that one is allowed) and a couple of their righteous and honest customers could profit from more open-mindedness.