On 1/14/20 7:37 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 15/01/2020 01:19, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 5:48 PM Daniel Pocock <dan...@pocock.pro
On 15/01/2020 00:42, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> This will create a lot of paperwork which puts GNU project
maintainers in a
> very bad position. In practice, ....
this is the sad reality of an organization where volunteers have not
been registered as equal members with equal votes in the corporate
entity, FSF, Inc
You are missing the point entirely. This is not about representation or
this is about the burden of daily activities.
I agree those issues are important and burdensome for the project
Nonetheless, contributors have a right to decide who owns the
*contributors* have already made that decision -- they filed the
paperwork and *continue to* contribute. It would be irresponsible for
someone with an assignment, to revoke that assignment /and/ continue
You could decide you no longer wished to contribute to an FSF project,
and no longer submit patches to it (in addition to any explicit
public/private message you might send).
AFAICT there is no example of adding a revocation to the copyright.list
file. I never noticed one. I noticed that my individual assignment,
including an employer assignment, never had a note later when I changed
employers and ended up covered by the employer's blanket assignment.
The closest it gets are assignments that are explicitly time-limited
from the get go -- they have a termination date when assigned.
Now, that's not to suggest your idea is inherently bad. The thought had
occurred to me too -- stop contributing. But I decided things would
have to be really dire to do that.