Skip to content

Revise partner reference requirements in terms and conditions #307

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
ebullient wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Revise partner reference requirements in terms and conditions #307

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
3a27b3f
Revise partner reference requirements in terms and conditions
ebullient Apr 16, 2026
c92a1ac
Update agreements/project-contribution/terms-and-conditions.md
ebullient Apr 22, 2026
72228fb
tighten language (still all or none)
ebullient Apr 22, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion agreements/project-contribution/terms-and-conditions.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ for users seeking continued support.

**Partner support references:**
Projects are not required to name individual OSSI partners on project pages. A link to the Foundation’s OSSI page is sufficient.
If a project chooses to reference individual partners, it should do so in a fair and non-misleading manner consistent with the Foundation’s Trademark Policy and Code of Conduct.
If a project chooses to reference an individual partner, it must also reference all other OSSI partners that provide EOL support for that project, in a fair and non-misleading manner consistent with the Foundation’s Trademark Policy and Code of Conduct.
Comment thread
yrodiere marked this conversation as resolved.

@tomjenkinson tomjenkinson May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a list of these so projects know who to list? Will it be on https://github.com/commonhaus/foundation/blob/72228fb0c5f145f33fecebe4e7196079e3c22096/agreements/project-contribution/terms-and-conditions.md?

@ebullient ebullient May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If someone is offering paid EOL support for your project, you will know. They will ask to be listed. ;)

@tomjenkinson tomjenkinson May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks - how about removing the burden of discovery from the different projects, by going with something like all other OSSI partners who request to be listed for an individual project, and provide EOL support for that project. Otherwise I might worry I haven't listed everyone due to not knowing because it does say must?

@ebullient ebullient May 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Again.. if someone adds support for your project, they will let you know. They will want to be listed. And in that case, you must list them.

@tomjenkinson tomjenkinson May 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well, it might just be me and maybe this is how documents of this type are written, but I would say if it says "must do something" we need to try to take reasonable steps to do that. Hence I was trying to reduce the burden on the project needing to seek out those people they should list. I wouldn't know how to find that. I think you are saying that we don't need to seek people out and just respond when asked, that is fine for me and I think the wording I suggested would then make it clear it's not my responsibility to find them.

So it's clear, I propose to change If a project chooses to reference an individual partner, it must also reference all other OSSI partners that provide EOL support for that project, in a fair and non-misleading manner consistent with the Foundation’s Trademark Policy and Code of Conduct. to If a project chooses to reference an individual partner, it must also reference all other OSSI partners who request to be listed for an individual project, and provide EOL support for that project, in a fair and non-misleading manner consistent with the Foundation’s Trademark Policy and Code of Conduct. Or maybe it's better as: If a project chooses to reference an individual partner, it must also reference all other OSSI partners that provide EOL support for that project and who request to be listed for an individual project, in a fair and non-misleading manner consistent with the Foundation’s Trademark Policy and Code of Conduct.

However, it might be that the foundation is fine for us to that that approach (needing to be informed before we can fulfil the obligation) and will be understanding of projects that have not fulfilled this requirement (because of the need to list "vendor x" not having been clear to them).

@ebullient ebullient May 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the latter interpretation is correct. If you didn't list them because you didn't know, that is easy to correct as soon as you do.

@tomjenkinson tomjenkinson May 1, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

fair and non-misleading
Does this mean more all earlier in the sentence? If not, is there some guidance on what that means from a trademark point of view (maybe it's in https://github.com/commonhaus/foundation/blob/72228fb0c5f145f33fecebe4e7196079e3c22096/policies/trademark-guidelines.md somewhere?) or the Code of Conduct (https://www.commonhaus.org/policies/code-of-conduct/).

How about just:
If a project chooses to reference an individual partner, it must also reference all other OSSI partners that provide EOL support for that project in a manner consistent with the Foundation’s Trademark Policy and Code of Conduct.
?

@ebullient ebullient May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is more about avoiding endorsement or preference. You could list all with an obvious bias toward one...

@ebullient ebullient May 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also: it is "individual partners" because you could start with two, and "individual partner or partners" is unnecessarily wordy.


## Intellectual Property Management

Expand Down