On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 01:26:07 -0700 "Daniel Robbins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > But you appear to act as the project lead for PMS. > > > > No, I'm just the one who isn't yet sufficiently jaded by the whole > > "people who don't know what PMS is jumping in and trying to derail > > it" thing to have given up discussing it in public yet. > > Who is the project lead then?
spb. > Also, you are at least a developer of PMS, if not the lead. If PMS is > an official Gentoo project, then since when can official Gentoo > projects have "non-dev" devs? How many non-developers contribute to the tree? How many non-developers have submitted patches for Portage or eselect? > > I'd be interested to see where this policy is documented. The > > licence requirements are in the social contract; what about > > copyright? As far as I'm aware, copyright requirements are only > > imposed upon the tree... > > The Foundation was created to hold the copyrights for all Gentoo > source code and documentation, logos, etc. I assigned the copyright of > all Gentoo source code and documentation to the Gentoo Foundation for > this purpose. This purpose (among others) is documented at > http://foundation.gentoo.org. But there's no requirement that copyright be assigned to the Foundation, as far as I can see... At least, not for people who didn't sign the draconian agreement that also meant that they had to hand over all their hardware to the Foundation upon request... > In the event of a copyright violation, the Foundation is able to hire > a lawyer and act on behalf of all the copyright assignors. Without the > assignment this is very difficult to do. If you would like to be able > to have Gentoo enforce the terms of its licenses, then this is > important. The FSF does the same thing. You know all this already. If > you disagree with this approach, I certainly understand. This is a myth perpetuated by the FSF for political reasons. There have been plenty of successful defences (usually out of court) of projects with huge numbers of copyright holders -- consider Linux, for example. > > I'm also curious as to why people should be expected to assign > > copyright to a group that is known for licence violations and > > removing attribution from documents. How does this protect anything? > > Copyright assignment (first to Gentoo Technologies, Inc., then to > Gentoo Foundation, Inc.) has *ALWAYS* been Gentoo policy. Where is this documented? As far as I'm aware, there are two copyright requirements: * The "ebuilds in the tree" requirement, which is documented in various places * The "all developers must sign a legal assignment form" requirement, which was scrapped long ago. > 1) Any material created by Gentoo developers, as part of an official > Gentoo Project, needs to have copyright assigned to the Gentoo > Foundation, whether or not it is currently included in the Portage > tree. This protects all of our collective contributions against > misuse, which is why it is policy. Where is this requirement documented? > 2) Any material not assigned to the Gentoo Foundation cannot be > considered an official Gentoo Project. It would not fall under the > umbrella/scope of the development project that is Gentoo, which is in > part a legal structure to protect our collective work, (code, logos, > etc.) and would be considered a third-party project. Where is this requirement documented? How do you account for the official Gentoo projects that do not follow this requirement? > I'd be really surprised - flabbergasted, really - if this has changed. > But at this point I almost wouldn't be surprised. :) Again, so far as I'm aware, the only non-tree copyright assignment that was a requirement was for developers who signed the long-abolished hideous legal document. If there are requirements to the contrary that I've missed then I'd like to see them -- as the main copyright holder for at least one official Gentoo project, this is something that is extremely relevant to me. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
