[darcs-users] Licensing and copyright fun.

Trent W. Buck trentbuck at gmail.com
Sat Oct 11 08:43:07 UTC 2008


On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 08:38:23AM +0100, Eric Kow wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 17:57:29 +1100, Trent W. Buck wrote:
> > Unfortunately, release/openssl_ok indicates that correspondents
> > were agreeing to exceptions, but not an actual license!  I think
> > this means we need to talk to everyone who has worked on Darcs so
> > far, and get them to agree to license their work under the terms
> > of GPL-2 or higher, with the exceptions mentioned in
> > release/openssl_ok.
> 
> Oh boy! Is there any chance we can leave the super-yes people alone,
> i.e. people who say something to the effect of "I am willing to let the
> community or at least David Roundy" decide?

That sounds reasonable to me.  (Note that I'm not a legal nut; I'm
just stumbling my way through these issues like the rest of you.)

> If we are going to do something like this, we should try to make it
> a lot easier on oursleves in the future and request (those who are
> willing) to assign copyright or whatever it takes to make reduce the
> paperwork.

Copyright assignment is certainly something to look into; it has other
benefits along with merely making licensing issues easier.  But I
think it would result in MORE, PHYSICAL paperwork -- at least in the
short term.

>> Eric, would you like to schedule a meeting to discuss this in IRC?
>> I'm in the +1100 timezone at the moment, and I'm available all > >
>> weekend.
>
> I will be travelling until Thursday.  I expect to be online and
> doing some darcs stuff, but there may be some disruptions, at least
> over the weekend.  Sorry for that!  Perhaps next weekend?

No worries.  These licensing issues are serious and important, but I
don't think deferring them for another week is going to make much
difference.


More information about the darcs-users mailing list