Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Paul <set@×××××.com>
To: Karl Trygve Kalleberg <karltk@×××××××.no>
Cc: Paul <set@××××.loc>, gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo Copyright
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 21:39:29
Message-Id: 20020814023926.GD4017@squish.home.loc
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Copyright by Karl Trygve Kalleberg
1 Karl Trygve Kalleberg <karltk@×××××××.no>, on Wed Aug 14, 2002 [03:54:21 AM] said:
2 >
3 >
4 > On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Paul wrote:
5 >
6 > > As far as the copyright goes, if you _require_ me to
7 > > give you my copyright in order to accept a submitted ebuild,
8 > > well, thats fine.
9 >
10 > We only require that you license your ebuild under the GPL v2 or
11 > later. Once we do changes to the ebuild file, we add the standard
12 > Gentoo, Inc. copyright statement to the file.
13 >
14 > > Why is GPLing it not sufficient?
15 >
16 > It is. Anybody who tell you differently is lying :)
17 >
18
19 Hi;
20
21 Thankyou very much for this clarification, and
22 explaination. I think what had happened to me, was that I
23 was simply relying upon the implicit copyright of authorship, and
24 when that line that indicated I was the author was removed, that
25 consistituted a change to the ebuild, and the gentoo copyright
26 was added. If I put in an explicit copyright, I assume it
27 would have been preserved...
28
29 Paul
30 set@×××××.com
31
32 >
33 > As for maintainership: There is currently no formalised concept of
34 > maintainership. In time, this will most likely be remedied.
35 >
36 >
37 > Kind regards,
38 >
39 > Karl T
40 >
41 >
42 > _______________________________________________
43 > gentoo-dev mailing list
44 > gentoo-dev@g.o
45 > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev