1 |
On 12/15/2012 11:20 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> Gentoo isn't GitHub. When people donate money to Gentoo they're not |
3 |
> donating so that a club of elite coders can use the infrastructure to |
4 |
> host just anything that suits their fancy. The reason that we let any |
5 |
> Gentoo developer just start a project is because it helps promote |
6 |
> innovation and cuts through bureaucracy. That doesn't mean that |
7 |
> Gentoo holds no interest in the work that is done under its name. |
8 |
|
9 |
I made the github comparison as a simplification to preempt further |
10 |
notions of the idea that being a Gentoo project reflects a collective |
11 |
agreement that we are abandoning systemd-udevd in our distribution. |
12 |
|
13 |
> I think that Duncan pointed out a great reason to use LGPL, and using |
14 |
> a license that lets us better collaborate with the overall FOSS |
15 |
> community is something I think is well-aligned with Gentoo's mission |
16 |
> (We Will Give Back to the Free Software Community). However, if we |
17 |
> use LGPL it should because of something like this, and not simply be |
18 |
> because those working on the project picked it. If for whatever |
19 |
> reason the fork diverges to a point where we aren't giving back in the |
20 |
> form of patches to upstream then I'd argue that it would make sense to |
21 |
> move back to the GPL (something trivially done with or without |
22 |
> copyright assignment due to the nature of the LGPL). |
23 |
|
24 |
The systemd developers have made it clear that they are not interested |
25 |
in our changes. That is why we forked in the first place. Our plan is to |
26 |
keep the door open for them to cherry-pick patches should they decide to |
27 |
start supporting some of the system configurations that we support. I |
28 |
consider this to be the reason why OSS developers give away source code |
29 |
in the first place. |