On Tue, 25 Sep 2001 08:27:13 -0400, Paul Everitt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Martijn Faassen wrote:
http://dev.zope.org/CVS/Contributor.pdf
This says 'you must indicate your agreement to the term below'; shouldn't
it be 'terms'?
Uhh...well...yes! I'll make the change. I'm waiting for
On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:13:57 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time), Paul
Everitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, let's begin what I'm sure will be a lively and illuminating
discussion. :^)
A question about Joint Ownership
The ZPL currently includes a no-liability clause. If one half-owner
were to
Paul Everitt writes:
We'll probably work up some boilerplate such as, I'm going to commit
your patch to Zope. It's going to be available under the ZPL and the
joint ownership model of the Zope Contributor Agreement. Please respond
agreeing that you understand the ZPL, the joint
Paul Everitt wrote:
At last, the announcement I've been dying to make. After much
deliberation -- meaning, I've procrastinated for too long :^) -- I'm
pleased to announce our approach for opening the CVS repository to
community checkins.
Cool, at last!
Martijn Faassen wrote:
http://dev.zope.org/CVS/Contributor.pdf
This says 'you must indicate your agreement to the term below'; shouldn't
it be 'terms'?
Uhh...well...yes! I'll make the change. I'm waiting for news back from
the lawyer about provisions for handling patches. I'll then
Paul Everitt wrote:
Does anyone think this is close enough that I can go ahead and get the
bootstrap group (under ten, selected by us) going? I'd like to avoid
making them sign and mail an agreement, then do it again if there's
substantive changes.
Yup :-)
Chris
Does anyone think this is close enough that I can go ahead and get the
bootstrap group (under ten, selected by us) going? I'd like to avoid
making them sign and mail an agreement, then do it again if there's
substantive changes.
Go for it.
OK, a response. Sorry for the delay.
First, I'll change the part of the introduction that says:
Essentially, a committer signs an agreement stating that all
code that the committer submits has been created by her.
...to say:
Essentially, a committer signs an agreement stating that
Does anyone think this is close enough that I can go ahead and get the
bootstrap group (under ten, selected by us) going? I'd like to avoid
making them sign and mail an agreement, then do it again if there's
substantive changes.
Have fun with it.
On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Paul Everitt wrote:
Repugnancy aside :^) your second comment is on the mark. It isn't so
much that you need to assign and lose ownership. Rather, the
committer needs to ensure that they aren't violating your rights.
We'll probably work up some boilerplate such as, I'm
On Tue, 2001-09-25 at 09:19, Paul Everitt wrote:
We'll probably work up some boilerplate such as, I'm going to commit
your patch to Zope. It's going to be available under the ZPL and the
joint ownership model of the Zope Contributor Agreement. Please respond
agreeing that you
On Tue, 2001-09-25 at 05:27, Paul Everitt wrote:
Does anyone think this is close enough that I can go ahead and get the
bootstrap group (under ten, selected by us) going? I'd like to avoid
making them sign and mail an agreement, then do it again if there's
substantive changes.
Full
I imagine that the group will decide rules on peer reviewing. For
comparison, the Mozilla group has very elaborate rules for checkins,
while Python has pretty much an innocent until proven guilty culture.
(That is, you check something in, and if somebody complains, it gets
removed.)
I
Hi Paul! Hi list!
In the last couple of weeks I have really looked forward for the CVS to be
finally opened. Not that I would be the first to be accepted as a
contributor (my Python is still lousy, as Stephan Richter could tell you
...), but I read things from ZC like We are too busy to get
This is a good point, and one that we need to settle on pretty quickly.
The language is an artifact from the Mozilla contributor form, which
served as the starting point for this. We intended to follow it, but
with the advent of the joint ownership idea (which came late in the
process),
R. David Murray writes:
...
So, the many small contributions that make a bazaar software project
tend rapidly toward high quality, which is one of the things I got
the impression you are trying to achieve by opening up the CVS
repository, may not materialize under this Agreement. We'll
I'll reply in more depth later (on the way out for my b-day dinner), but
in short: I think the issue of overhead on patches is something for us
to consider. We won't do something that breaks the integrity of the
code base, but there might be ample discussion directions. Thanks!
--Paul
On Fri, 2001-09-21 at 15:51, Paul Everitt wrote:
I'll reply in more depth later (on the way out for my b-day dinner)
Hey, happy birthday, Paul!
Michael Bernstein.
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Paul Everitt wrote:
So, let's begin what I'm sure will be a lively and illuminating
discussion. :^)
First man out? :-)
Will a ZPL-ish license [1] be accepted (declared, ref. paragraph
4 of the Zope Contributor Agreement) by the Zope Corporation?
[1]
19 matches
Mail list logo
