The one thing I dont like about that agreement is that it forces to retreat from the personal copyright if I remember the document correctly. Even though personally I would not mind that for bug fixes and small enhancements where my copyright would not be so much of a big deal. For bigger tools and code that I have put substantial effort and suffered pain to make them work I would not give away my copyright. So I am not seeing myself signing this any time soon either.
Revealing my real name and some other stuff is not a problem. So I can certainly understand some of your frustration webwarrior. On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:47 AM, webwarrior <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Considering that there are a couple of responses and the fact that you >> guys are so easily offended, I will not answer everyone but just state >> couple of theses. >> >> >> 0. I will not reveal my real name, because I value privacy. Nickname is >> sufficient for identification purposes. Any other information (real >> name, address, etc.) is not needed for actually contributing code. Think >> of principle of least privilege. >> >> 1. I could easily make up some human-looking name (Satoshi Nakamoto >> anyone?), but will not do it out of principle (see #0). >> >> 2. Knowing contributor's "real" name would not guard you against any >> possible malicious actions from him, because it can't be verified (see >> #1). One can also make up address, and even signature, if needed, and I >> bet no one would spot it. >> >> 3. I don't buy argument about requirements of some organizations. Linux >> kernel is used in billions of devices and by countless organizations, >> and I highly doubt that contributing to Linux requires anything like >> singing an agreement or whatever. >> > > You'd be surprised. > >> >> 4. Even in paid services checking a checkbox is usually sufficient for >> accepting any license/ToS. > > >> 5. My intentions are mostly of pragmatic nature. To make things that I >> use (and that can be useful to Pharo users) be in upstream. >> >> 6. I don't care whether you drink beer, your political views, or your >> interpersonal relationships (however story with Benjamin shows that >> perhaps everything's not as great as you paint it). These are all >> irrelevant to Pharo development, from my point of view at least. >> >> 7. If you don't agree with my arguments and stick to your rules, go for >> it. I'm in no position to tell you what's the right thing to do. I'll >> just end this discussion and leave. >> > > Farewell then. > > Phil > > >> >> ------------------------------ >> View this message in context: Re: License agreement - are you kidding me? >> <http://forum.world.st/License-agreement-are-you-kidding-me-tp4865853p4865912.html> >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive >> <http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html> at >> Nabble.com. >> >
