On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Charlie Clark <charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu> wrote: >> https://github.com/popular/starred >> i doubt that github i willing to get into the doghouse by doing really >> nasty things - and thus getting into risk of loosing projects. > > This is pure speculation, or are you privy to board decisions at Github.
Yet again, I point out that the nastiest thing they legally can do is spamming your email address. > I raised a specific objection: that the onus is on anyone with a Github > account to demonstrate their code does not violate any patents in the case > of a claim feels like a pretty real threat to me. If you are on Github or not makes no difference. Github has that clause to protect themselves if somebody else hosts copyright or patent protected code. It means, should Zope violate any patents and Github get sued because of this, the Zope Foundation needs to pay any damages. If we host it ourself, the *we* get sued, and need to pay the damages anyway. Hence Github or no Github yet again makes little, if any, difference. > Again, as Jens has repeatedly said we should not conflate the separate items > of toolchain and service provider. Zope Foundation has hardware and a proven > track record in hosting. Is anyone actually criticising this? This is not about git vs svn. It's about using external services, with all the benefits this gets us, or not. And the arguments against are so far mostly because of perceived legal problems with using an external service. Problems that in fact either don't exist, or are just as severe with self-hosting of the code. //Lennart _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
