Jonas Smedegaard writes: > Quoting Nick M. Daly (2012-11-29 06:16:25) >> Jack Wilborn writes: >> >> > IMHO, I say that if they want to keep copyright to their code, then >> > we probably don't want it in the FB. My understanding is that we >> > wanted a copyright free box, has this changed or have I >> > misunderstood? >> >> I think you missed something big there. As far as I know [0], that's >> not a goal at all. Nobody's even asked me for a contributor >> agreement, much less copyright assignment: we'll cross that bridge >> when we come to it, I suppose. > > If "we" are Debian, then we need someone physical and identifiable in > charge of each piece of code, but those can act as proxy for others > keeping anonymous or pseudonymous. Important for Debian is that all code > is freely _licensed_. > > If "we" are the FreedomBox Foundation, then it will very much surprise > me if they[0] have different agenda than use Debian for all software > parts of the project. > > [0] I am part of Debian.
I do need to clear up something here: I think I spoke poorly in this email. I'm not a member of the FBX Foundation, the TAC, or of Debian. I was stating what I understood (and quite possibly misunderstood) from personal conversations of folks who are in those roles. I think the basic point though, is that which Jonas made. The code needs to be (DFSG-) free. As far as anonymous contributions go, I've removed the page from the wiki because I shouldn't presume that we (the people holding that information) are ready to keep it safe. I also don't know what Debian and the FBF's official policies are, so I don't want to inappropriately presume things for them. Nick
pgpjSUUjyf28E.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
