> I don't think the narrative is usually "you can't work on anything else"; it's that you can't claim to have two jobs.
In the case we're talking about, the employee was told they can't work on the kernel in their free time. Clearly not a second job.
> It's not clear to me that "setr@gmail.com" vs "setr@ibm.com" changes the equation on portfolio lookup by any significant degree.
In this case, they were told they couldn't work on the kernel even under their personal e-mail address - and to remove the credit for work they'd already done. Seems pretty clear-cut to me?
I’m not sure what you’re reading but it’s not what I’m reading.
TFA only talks about working under gmail vs ibm email; it says nothing about not working on it period (perhaps by removal from maintainer’s file? But I read that as switch it with it the IBM email, since that’s all it talks about otherwise.)
In the case we're talking about, the employee was told they can't work on the kernel in their free time. Clearly not a second job.
> It's not clear to me that "setr@gmail.com" vs "setr@ibm.com" changes the equation on portfolio lookup by any significant degree.
In this case, they were told they couldn't work on the kernel even under their personal e-mail address - and to remove the credit for work they'd already done. Seems pretty clear-cut to me?