Fixing a bug in something open-source should be acceptable to most employers. However, if new functionality is being added, then it becomes an entirely different conversation.

I think it is good that you were taking the legal + compliance sign-offs before pursuing it.

▲

tombert 2 hours ago | parent [-]

When I worked at Apple, they were extremely strict about contributions to FOSS stuff, even on your own time, even for simple stuff like bugfixes or opening a Github issue.

I am sure they have their reasons even if I don't agree with them, but it's made me very cautious about making PRs and the like while working at BigCos and making outside contributions to FOSS stuff.

This even more so, though, because of course I was doing it on company time, so I wouldn't really blame them for wanting to audit stuff to ensure I'm not divulging company secrets and the like.

▲

wiether 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> even on your own time, even for simple stuff like bugfixes or opening a Github issue

During a recruitment process with a company a few years ago, they quite early asked for my GH profile and complained that I hadn't much content available.

Later, they asked me to do a small exercise and put it on my GH account.

When they sent me the contract, there was a clause telling that I would work for them exclusively and would not be allowed to contribute to anything else than company projects, even in my own time.

I didn't signed, and every person in the process seemed unable to understand what was wrong.

	▲	em-bee an hour ago \| parent [-]
		fortunately that's illegal in many jurisdictions, but i still would not sign unless they removed that passage. i had one contract where i was able to replace the standard "we own all your work" passage into: "all your work will be released under the GPL"