On 3/9/06, Greg Haerr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This isn't what happens. Björn, Daniel and Linus are > still responsible, period. When a lawyer doesn't like something > about an open source project, they deal with the maintainers, > regardless of "who" contributed the code. If they don't like > something and are powerful (read have a real legal budget), then > they'll demand the code be removed, regardless of whether > the maintainers have a real or fake name associated with it. > This is because the maintainers maintain the code; the original > contributor, fake or not, may be missing in action. > > When microsoft came after me and demanded that the > Microwindows name be exterminated, they weren't > concerned with "who" wrote what, since they fully > realize they can't chase after contributions backed only > by a "name". Instead, they forced their will on the > maintainer (me), since I was available and actively > promoting the project. > > Tracking names for legal reasons doesn't accomplish > anything, in my experience. When the offending code needs > removal, that's where CVS comes in: the contributed code > is backed out. > > Regards, > > Greg
In my experience also, this is exactly what happens. The maintainers need little more than an email address that patches came from to back out all patches from a single contributor (of course, fixing the code after those patches have been removed is another story). I won't pretend to hold any influence in this project, but from my experience, an email address is more 'real' online than a name. As people have said, a name can be faked. An email address is functional, and so, is much more likely to be accurate. --tim
