Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
<div>Hi guys,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I'm still on this list. You can remove me if you want, though. (If you're going to, please send me a</div>
<div>courtesy email to let me know when I've been bumped)</div>
<div> </div>
<div>My advice is to define a clear goal. What are you trying to accomplish? Then, talk to your lawyers about</div>
<div>some practical steps you can take to get as close to this goal as you can. Your lawyers can help you </div>
<div>to determine what tradeoffs, if any, should be considered. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>You might also want to ask your lawyers their opinion about how important they think this copyright</div>
<div>issue actually is. If it's very important, it might be worthwhile upsetting and potentially losing some</div>
<div>developers to fix it. If it isn't that important, then it might not be. Maybe there are some key areas that</div>
<div>you could straighten out more easily (like the Portage code itself) and then others you could at least </div>
<div>temporarily ignore due to their complexity. I'm thinking of the actual ebuilds being a very complex issue.</div>
<div>Which is more likely to be ripped off? This should all factor into your plan.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I have tried to tackle this issue in the past, and it is harder than it looks. I think I would have been more</div>
<div>successful if I had tried to straighten out copyrights for some key areas of Gentoo rather than try to tackle</div>
<div>everything at once. Ebuilds are particularly thorny because so many people have touched them. </div>
<div>If fixing all the ebuilds is an impossible goal, then maybe focus on the possible instead?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I hope you can find a good solution. If you're ever in need of any additional paperwork from me, please</div>
<div>let me know.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>-Daniel</div>
<div> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/27/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Donnie Berkholz</b> <<a href="mailto:spyderous@g.o">spyderous@g.o</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>Hash: SHA1<br><br>Deedra Waters wrote:<br>> I'd suggest the license. I suspect that as long as the terms are right,
<br>> that people won't have problems with the license. Trying to maintain<br>> both a copyright, and a license would cause a lot of problems, and a<br>> copyright is much harder to handle since we would have to get anyone
<br>> under 18 to get their parents to sign the thing etc etc etc.<br><br>People under 18 can't consent to a license any more than an assignment,<br>so I don't understand your last point. But yes, maintaining both would
<br>be more work. The question is: Is it worth it?<br><br>Thanks,<br>Donnie<br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)<br><br>iD8DBQFCwMO0XVaO67S1rtsRAk1BAKDgLzs1y0SOkNO2ThVfnMbs5nBEXwCgjFmv<br>
ZQB0X4QB6xceRMVCzjggbxw=<br>=MyVE<br>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>--<br><a href="mailto:gentoo-trustees@g.o">gentoo-trustees@g.o</a> mailing list<br><br></blockquote></div><br>
|
|
