Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

My solution to this has been:

* When I need to work on something, I think of the library I wish existed to get it done. Anything I need that is employer-specific should be configurable

* I make the library and release it with an MIT license

* I then use that library to accomplish my goal

This has the benefit of usually making me write better software. And it motivates me to make the open code better quality and better documented. This means the work is more valuable even to my colleagues that also eventually need to work with it.




> * I make the library and release it with an MIT license

This might get you into trouble. Basically, anything you touch during your work hours is tainted by your employers copyrights. You're not allowed to decide which license that code should be under. So either you write that whole library in your spare time (and on top of that do your regular day job) or get your employers permission to release the code.

In general the approach is sound and I'd support it, but others might or might not.


Is your company's product open sourced? I think that is the exception, not the rule, and makes takes the discussion in a different direction


Be careful, I was sued for doing this (and lost). Had to pay up big.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: