On 2/11/2010 2:21 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Why didn't Erik Andersen fork the busybox to create his
> own non-joint version of busybox?
As far as I understand, he made changes to BusyBox to produce a new version. "Fork" would imply that he was making a version separate from one undergoing development by someone else. I do not know the history of BusyBox well enough to say if this was the case, but I would suspect that it wasn't. There is no joint copyright version of BusyBox, so asking why he did not create his own non-joint version makes an untrue implication.
They "agree and intend to do so" by posting contributions
> to joint work projects like busybox They do not. They post contributions to GPL-licensed programs, and the GPL is the only documentation of their intent. If the GPL intended to create a joint work it would say so, and since it does not, no joint work is created. Indeed, since the GPL spells out that GPLed work may be distributed only under the GPL, while joint authorship would allow later authors to distribute the work otherwise, it is clear that the GPL intends not to create a joint work. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss