Here is the proposal:
* https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-118
I kind of like this move, especially as there is less work for the PSC
contacting committers. I added in a proposed header change showing what our
headers would look like.
Jody Garnett
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Jody Garnett <[email protected]>
wrote:
> So I put together the text for GSIP-116 (see the bottom of the page):
> https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-116
>
> OpenPlans has seen these two agreements so it is okay put them up.
>
> However the long delays, combined with a change of leadership at
> OpenPlans, has resulted in an alternative being proposed ... OSGeo.
>
> Advantages:
> - A bit more reliable tracking paper work (great improvement due to new
> secretary)
> - Contributor agreement already available, those who signed for GeoTools
> are already covered
> - Good community vibe
> - More involved with GeoServer than OpenPlans
>
> Cons:
> - A bit more reliable tracking paper work (was hard to check on
> contributors previous to current secretary)
> - Mixed track record with respect to legal help (in the past our questions
> have been fielded by FSF)
> - OSgeo has no active management of IP, it is up to us as PSC to check
> stuff as part of each release
>
> I am going to bash up a proposal as GSIP-118 now (and will mark GSIP-116
> as deferred).
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infragistics Professional
Build stunning WinForms apps today!
Reboot your WinForms applications with our WinForms controls.
Build a bridge from your legacy apps to the future.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=153845071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
