Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] ICA or ICLA for SugarLabs ?
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 15:50, Bernie Innocenti ber...@laptop.org wrote: - in no case ask people to sing NDAs or copyright attributions; And anything we do have to sing, should be playable with free codecs. :) ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] ICA or ICLA for SugarLabs ?
Morgan Collett wrote: On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 15:50, Bernie Innocenti ber...@laptop.org wrote: - in no case ask people to sing NDAs or copyright attributions; And anything we do have to sing, should be playable with free codecs. ROTFL! ;- -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://www.sugarlabs.org/ ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] ICA or ICLA for SugarLabs ?
[cc += i...@] Rafael Enrique Ortiz Guerrero wrote: Thanks for your answer, and you are right this question is more suitable for IAEP. Yup, +1! And I side with Chris in trying not to bother our contributors with legal paperwork unless *absolutely* necessary. If we must, at least we should consider: - using paperless technologies (gpg signed email, web forms, etc.); - using only very fair and informal agreements like the Ubuntu Code of Conduct [1] and the USENIX Sage Code of Ethics [2]; - in no case ask people to sing NDAs or copyright attributions; [1] https://launchpad.net/codeofconduct [2] http://www.sage.org/ethics/ Rafael Ortiz On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org mailto:c...@laptop.org wrote: Hi Rafael, Do we have now and individual contributor agreement or Individual contributor license agreement for Sugar for Sugar Labs now ? No. We don't know that we want one, and the SFLC hasn't responded to our question about whether it might be important. It still doesn't seem like a worthwhile idea to me. Projects have an ICA when they're starting out and want to be sure to be able to enforce copyright on their work colletively, but Sugar's been around for a while and already has a mass of code that can't be retroactively covered by a license agreeement. So, the main positive point isn't applicable, and the main negative point about it being a huge turn-off for new contributors is still there. Feel free to ask questions like this on iaep@, I don't think we're trying to keep the fact that we're considering an ICA private. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org mailto:c...@laptop.org -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://www.sugarlabs.org/ ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] ICA or ICLA for SugarLabs ?
SLOBS CC removed Please continue to bug us about this It was so far down my todo list it fell of the end. Based on the fact the SFC has not gotten back to us it is pretty low on their list too. david On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 7:50 AM, Bernie Innocenti ber...@laptop.org wrote: [cc += i...@] Rafael Enrique Ortiz Guerrero wrote: Thanks for your answer, and you are right this question is more suitable for IAEP. Yup, +1! And I side with Chris in trying not to bother our contributors with legal paperwork unless *absolutely* necessary. If we must, at least we should consider: - using paperless technologies (gpg signed email, web forms, etc.); - using only very fair and informal agreements like the Ubuntu Code of Conduct [1] and the USENIX Sage Code of Ethics [2]; - in no case ask people to sing NDAs or copyright attributions; [1] https://launchpad.net/codeofconduct [2] http://www.sage.org/ethics/ Rafael Ortiz On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org mailto:c...@laptop.org wrote: Hi Rafael, Do we have now and individual contributor agreement or Individual contributor license agreement for Sugar for Sugar Labs now ? No. We don't know that we want one, and the SFLC hasn't responded to our question about whether it might be important. It still doesn't seem like a worthwhile idea to me. Projects have an ICA when they're starting out and want to be sure to be able to enforce copyright on their work colletively, but Sugar's been around for a while and already has a mass of code that can't be retroactively covered by a license agreeement. So, the main positive point isn't applicable, and the main negative point about it being a huge turn-off for new contributors is still there. Feel free to ask questions like this on iaep@, I don't think we're trying to keep the fact that we're considering an ICA private. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org mailto:c...@laptop.org -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://www.sugarlabs.org/ ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
