| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
I don't like playing the "work" card. I guess most of us are somehow |
| 4 |
employed -- saying we need this *change* or we would risk to discourage |
| 5 |
companies from allowing their employees to contribute to Gentoo on work |
| 6 |
time must feel like a slap in the face: |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Nobody had a problem with that before. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
There's just *one* contributor at the moment, SIE, who wants to change |
| 11 |
things ("taking the opportunity to revise previous permission to enforce |
| 12 |
something new"). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I disagree saying that this is general problem and we are discourage |
| 15 |
companies from contributing to Gentoo due to that. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I agree with Rich saying |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> IMO people who are only willing to contribute FOSS if their name gets |
| 20 |
> put in a prominent location might do better to contribute elsewhere. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
...and even if you are unemployed or just contributing in your free time |
| 23 |
your contribution has a value -- the same value like contributing during |
| 24 |
work time! So if we start allowing copyright attribution we would have |
| 25 |
to do that for *everyone*. Something I don't really want: |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Ebuilds aren't like normal program code. Ebuilds are changing very |
| 28 |
often. It will become a nightmare to track copyright to be able to |
| 29 |
remove a line when this contributed code is no longer present and |
| 30 |
therefore copyright attribution is no longer necessary nor correct. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
It is also a question on its own if you can ever claim copyright for |
| 33 |
things like ~1-10 lines of bash code (I guess we will never know because |
| 34 |
nobody will ever go to court for 1-10 lines of bash code)... |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Regards, |
| 39 |
Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 40 |
C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5 |
Archives