On 2/21/06, Stephan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 21 February 2006 05:13, Andrew Milton wrote:
> > Why should Mark Shuttleworth who has plenty of means, hand over IP for
> > (parts of) SchoolTool? I'm sure he has more than enough ways to protect his
> > IP. Or are you saying that
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Andrew Milton wrote:
+---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]--
|
| Handing over ownership to the ZF and therefore having signed a
| Contributor Agreement are the terms of the svn.zope.org repository, just
| like that code is to be made ZPL.
T
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 08:50, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> OK, so it is now clear from Stephans comments that thsi really is two
> separate proposals, just mixed into one file because of Stephans
> workload. I think we should properly split them up, because this
> clearly made a lot of people conf
OK, so it is now clear from Stephans comments that thsi really is two
separate proposals, just mixed into one file because of Stephans
workload. I think we should properly split them up, because this
clearly made a lot of people confused, and I wonder if anybody that
read this proposal realized tha
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 07:15, Andrew Milton wrote:
> The proposal currently requires 3rd party code to be handed over to Zope
> Foundation[1] AND checked into the ZF svn repository in order to be
> 'certified'. You indicated this was indeed the case.
That's not true. Phillip and I both negate
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 05:30, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Anyways, you're welcome to contribute code to the z3base if you'd prefer
> a public repository that doesn't require IP handover/sharing. Who knows,
> perhaps we'll even manage to implement the ZSCP for some packages there :).
Th
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 05:13, Andrew Milton wrote:
> Why should Mark Shuttleworth who has plenty of means, hand over IP for
> (parts of) SchoolTool? I'm sure he has more than enough ways to protect his
> IP. Or are you saying that it makes sense for ZF/ZC to protect him?
The reason the School
Okay, this discussion is off-topic. I will not respond to it, unless I read
about something that relates directly to the proposal.
Regards,
Stephan
--
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
__
On Tuesday 21 February 2006 03:57, Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
> Putting stuff into svn.zope.org *does* have advantages:
>
> * it's easy to feed packages upstream to Zope for a later inclusion into
> a Zope distribution.
>
> * putting a project/package under the wings of the ZF ensures long-te
On Monday 20 February 2006 23:55, Andrew Milton wrote:
Wow, you took the following two quotes out of context.
>
> The Common Repository is *not* a replacement for other high-level
> repositories like Plone's or ECM's. It does not aim at assimilating
> everything in the wider Zope community. It is
Andrew Milton wrote:
> +---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]--
> |
> | > | * putting a project/package under the wings of the ZF ensures long-term
> | > | IP protection
> | >
> | > How? I think my death + 70 years is further away than the death of ZF, or
> in
> | > fact the de
Andrew Milton wrote:
> +---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]--
> |
> | Handing over ownership to the ZF and therefore having signed a
> | Contributor Agreement are the terms of the svn.zope.org repository, just
> | like that code is to be made ZPL.
>
> The license part is irre
Andrew Milton wrote:
> +---[ Philipp von Weitershausen ]--
> | Andrew Milton wrote:
> | > +---[ Stephan Richter ]--
> | > | Hello everyone,
> | > |
> | > | With the development of Zope 3, the Zope developers committed to a new
> | > | development pr
13 matches
Mail list logo
