On 3/16/19 11:07 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > However this leads to another question we should write about: > if someone on a regular basis provides code to the gnunet repository, > at which point do we decide that this needs a CAA? Is there a threshold? > How do we define "trivial patches" (I think we mention this on the > contributions page)?
As usual with legal stuff, it's not easy to draw a clear line. Copyright law imposes a so-called "creativity threshold", and usually a simple bugfix is not creative but "obvious to any person trained in the arts". Anyway, for this, there cannot be a hard rule, and the best answer I have is that we should try to get CAAs whenever possible, just to minimize legal risk. > Can a regular contributor be someone who does not sign the CAA or > will the step to regular contribution always lead to the CAA? I'd hope that the CAA is worded in a way that we can convince all regular contributors to sign it. If they do not, yes, we might at some point be forced to refuse their contributions, but I really hope it will never come to that. Note again that pseudonymous contributions are OK, the CAA can be signed with a pseudonym. > I'm asking really obvious questions here not from my perspective, > because these are questions people might have and we should answer > them. Agreed. Might even be useful to add some of this to the FAQ.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
