| 1 |
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Paul wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> However, I see that the policy seems to be to rip |
| 4 |
> out any reference to my name/email, and slap a Gentoo Copyright |
| 5 |
> on them. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
This is plain wrong. Unless you have been contacted and agreed |
| 8 |
specifically to this, the developer has made a boo-boo. Ripping our the |
| 9 |
copyright is stealing. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> This makes me uncomfortable. And its technically wrong. |
| 12 |
> I dont want my email address in the ebuild for glory (if there |
| 13 |
> can be any such thing in a grotty bit of shell and sed), |
| 14 |
> but I wrote the thing, and if someone has a problem, they could |
| 15 |
> send me some email, and I might be the best person to fix it. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The issue is that we don't want to meld the "CREDITS" file with |
| 18 |
the ebuild file. We keep the credits in the ChangeLog file |
| 19 |
instead. Thus, if you submit a new ebuild, put your name in the |
| 20 |
ChangeLog file (that you of course also submit alongside the |
| 21 |
ebuild). |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
In some cases, we have accepted the following header: |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
# Copyright 2002 Your Name <your@×××××.address> |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
In general, we only (occasionally) accept this for completely new ebuilds, |
| 29 |
because we really want to keep the revision history and detailed credits |
| 30 |
in the ChangeLog. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
If you submit a patch or any kind of update to an existing ebuild, you'll |
| 33 |
be credited in the ChangeLog file, as all the rest of us. If you notice |
| 34 |
that you've not been credited, but your fixes have been applied, please |
| 35 |
notify us; it means somebody made another booboo. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> As far as the copyright goes, if you _require_ me to |
| 38 |
> give you my copyright in order to accept a submitted ebuild, |
| 39 |
> well, thats fine. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
We only require that you license your ebuild under the GPL v2 or |
| 42 |
later. Once we do changes to the ebuild file, we add the standard |
| 43 |
Gentoo, Inc. copyright statement to the file. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
> Why is GPLing it not sufficient? |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
It is. Anybody who tell you differently is lying :) |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
As for maintainership: There is currently no formalised concept of |
| 51 |
maintainership. In time, this will most likely be remedied. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Kind regards, |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
Karl T |
Archives