Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200410252004.i9PK4Pw8066415@xl2.seyza.com>
From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
To: fw@deneb.enyo.de
In-reply-to: <87brewc8fr.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> (message from Florian Weimer on
	Thu, 21 Oct 2004 19:00:56 +0200)
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU copyright assignment
References: <87vfd5xhe0.fsf@flame.org> <20041020214600.GA624@merconline.com>
	<1098313404.5336.26.camel@whiskas.cashpoolcomps.com>
	<87brewc8fr.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
Precedence: list
Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1105
Lines: 35

    > From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>

    > > Tom wants this to be a GNU project.

    > > This has consequences - the primary one being that copyright
    > > is assigned to the FSF (for "GNU arch proper").

    > I think the copyright assignment is optional.  Other things are more
    > important.

Because the proportion of code that I *don't* own (and hence can't
personally assign to the FSF) is currently so small, it is not a
disaster if there remains some code which has not been assigned.

However, going forward, I hope to reach a state where all
non-"trivial" contributions (i.e., those meritting copyright
protection) are either assigned or are rejected because they have not
been assigned.

This isn't a major burdon on contributors, imo.   It's just basic
professionalism, by several metrics (auditability, accountability, and
deliberately formal process).

-t


_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/