On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 16:37 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 06/01/2011 04:03 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 15:53 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > >> OK, so this is really an objection to the OCA per se: it assumes that the > >> OCA is in general, a Bad Thing, so anything that can be done to reduce > >> its use is, by definition, a Good Thing. > > > > Of course. > > But you can't simply assume that this is so for the sake of a response > to the OpenJDK Community Bylaws. It's only conditionally true: "if the > OCA is in general a Bad Thing then we shouldn't require GB members to be > OCA signatories." But I don't think that the GB believes that the OCA > is in general a Bad Thing.
It doesn't help that the OCA seems to have disappeared from the planet to better explain which parts are the most troublesome. The GB might not yet believe it. But there is a lot of evidence these kind of over reaching agreements don't foster healthy communities. http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/11/contributor-agreements-say-your-contribution-is-unwelcome/index.htm So whenever possible it seems sensible to try to minimize their usage, who and what they cover. > >> But this doesn't make any sense. If you do not contribute any code to > >> the project then it does not matter at all whether you have signed the > >> OCA. No code has changed hands, so you have not given away any rights > >> to that nonexistent code. > > > > In general I try to avoid signing legal papers if they are not > > necessary :) I assume most people will not just sign some paper just > > because it might be fun one day and this giant US corporation would > > really be happy if you just signed it right now "just in case". > > Right, but this objection has no logical basis. It depends on the definitions in the OCA for "contribution". And in general it does take time and energy to analyze legal documents. If not by you personally, then by your legal department. It is all time and energy drained from actually creating the community in the first place. Cheers, Mark
