Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU copyright assignment

[James Blackwell]

jblack:
>> Speaking of which, how far along is the process of getting everybody with
>> copyright in arch to assign copyright to the FSF? Also, what's going to
>> happen to code that isn't handed over? 
 
Zenaan: 
> Rather than "letting life do it to me", how about getting
> clear on what _you_ want, making suggestions, and discussing
> on the list?

Grin. What I want is for arch development to move as fast as possible,
so fast that it beats all the others by default.

Regarding Tom's "assign copyright to the FSF idea", I don't have an
opinion that I would like to express at this point. Before I do, I'd
like to know how he'll work out the details of the following two points: 

1. How does he plan on chasing down the previous contributors and
   getting a copyright assignment? 

2. Is he going to follow through and remove code contributed by people
   that he either can't find or that refuse to assign copyright to him
   or the FSF 

These are both necessary steps of the process, and have to happen. As
such, the question need to be asked.

These are both _very_ important questions, as can be proved by the
ongoing SCO vs. The World copyright case with the Linux kernel. That's
why Linus is investing in a new "follow the bouncing ball" for code
ownership.  I personally don't want to get hauled into court 24 months
from now because some guy named Barry McLoy tries to make a 70 yard punt
as a last ditch effort to save his business.

> If the answers must always come from on high, I suspect you
> shall be forever somewhat disappointed in what_ever_ happens.

Why would you think that I don't make decisions for myself? Is it
because I listen to others? 

> Tom wants this to be a GNU project.

It already is. I think that was an excellent decision.

> This has consequences - the primary one being that copyright
> is assigned to the FSF (for "GNU arch proper").

That used to be obligatory, but these days its optional.

> You can then make an assessment of what you will and won't
> contribute to _GNU_ arch.
>
> I'm sure you can think of various options here that you might
> choose to follow...


>
> A rebelliousness in your words I feel. Which is fine of course,
> if that's the kind of conversations you want to have here.

Ok yoda. ;) 

Actually, I'm not much of a rebel type. 

> What sort of community do you want? Who do you plan to be in
> this community? Or will it forever depend on what others say,
> what others do and what others decide?

I'd like to take those in reverse order if you don't mind. 

When it comes to which voluntary communities that people choose to
participate in, the goals and the action of the community do count;
after all, who would remain in a voluntary community that one thinks is
doing the wrong thing? 

Regarding deciding who's in this community, I don't think that anybody
has the authority to decide that. And if there was somebody, I certainly
wouldn't want it to be me! 

Lastly, for what sort of community would I want? Well, this may sound
silly, but I think I'd really go for some sort of victorian style of
utopia. 

>
>
> _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing
> list address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
>
> GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
>


-- 
James Blackwell          Try something fun: For the next 24 hours, give
Smile more!              each person you meet a compliment!

GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400