[gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-24 Thread Ryan Hill
Ryan Hill wrote: > Michael Cummings wrote: > a. The Project Will Be Free Software. The Conservancy and the Project agree that any software distributed by the Project will be distributed solely as Free Software. > >>> If that's not a problem I think this is a great idea.

[gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-23 Thread Ryan Hill
Michael Cummings wrote: >>> a. The Project Will Be Free Software. The Conservancy and the Project >>> agree that >>>any software distributed by the Project will be distributed solely as >>> Free Software. >> If that's not a problem I think this is a great idea. > It's not a problem - wh

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-23 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:03:50 -0700 Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 14:06 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > > Well, we'd be the second distribution, as Debian uses the SFC. > > > Also, realize that we've already gone through all of thi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-23 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 14:06 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > Well, we'd be the second distribution, as Debian uses the SFC. Also, > > realize that we've already gone through all of this with the SFC and > > wouldn't even be bringing it up as an option if the SFC hadn't a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-23 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Sun, 2007-07-22 at 17:28 -0700, Josh Saddler wrote: > Ryan Hill wrote: > > Marius Mauch wrote: > >> While I think this would be an excellent move, there are a few topics > >> that concern me a bit: > >> 1) just to be sure, did someone check the transfer agreement between the > >> Foundation and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-23 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Chris Gianelloni wrote: > Well, we'd be the second distribution, as Debian uses the SFC. Also, > realize that we've already gone through all of this with the SFC and > wouldn't even be bringing it up as an option if the SFC hadn't already > approved us. They are aware of the state of our tree and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-23 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Sun, 2007-07-22 at 12:49 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > Marius Mauch wrote: > > While I think this would be an excellent move, there are a few topics > > that concern me a bit: > > 1) just to be sure, did someone check the transfer agreement between the > > Foundation and the old Gentoo, Inc for pote

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-23 Thread Michael Cummings
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 12:49:33PM -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > It might be worth noting that it appears that Gentoo would be the first > distribution to join. I'd be interested in knowing if the SFC considers > distributing closed-source or proprietary software (nero, ati/nvidia > drivers, vmware) t

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-22 Thread Mike Frysinger
a topic for the gentoo-nfp list since it'd be the trustees making the decision -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-22 Thread Josh Saddler
Ryan Hill wrote: > Marius Mauch wrote: >> While I think this would be an excellent move, there are a few topics >> that concern me a bit: >> 1) just to be sure, did someone check the transfer agreement between the >> Foundation and the old Gentoo, Inc for potential problems? >> 2) what would this m

[gentoo-dev] Re: joining the Software Freedom Conservancy

2007-07-22 Thread Ryan Hill
Marius Mauch wrote: > While I think this would be an excellent move, there are a few topics > that concern me a bit: > 1) just to be sure, did someone check the transfer agreement between the > Foundation and the old Gentoo, Inc for potential problems? > 2) what would this mean for our copyright si