On 8/3/07, Behdad Esfahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 21:48 +0200, Juan José Sánchez Penas wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 01:40:39PM -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > > > ownership. When multiple companies (Red Hat, Novell, Sun, ...) own > > > copyright on a package, it's harder to do something wrong (for example, > > > to relicense the package under a new license). > > > > Is this always something wrong? I guess sometimes making easier to change a > > license can be good (in terms of freedom, for example). All depends on how > > much you (want to) trust the copyright holder. > > Yeah, could be good if it was easier to say change Evo from GPLv2 to > GPLv3+, but you either end up having many copyright holders anyway (all > the people submitting non-trivial patches on bugzilla) or risk blocking > development by bureaucracy of having to submit disclaimer or assignment > forms first, like what Sun is doing with Java right now, or FSF with > Emacs and some other projects.
But of course you have to weigh that risk (which is very real) with the risk of someone finding a gigantic loophole in the existing license and driving a truck through it. Not that any of *our* contributors would do such a thing. Ahem. ;) Luis _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list