FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-06-2011, 07:19 PM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 07-06-2011

On 07/06/2011 11:52 PM, Jon Stanley wrote:
> ** Having a default licensing agreement makes sense, don't want to go
> towards copyright assignment

This makes it seem like a either/or choice. That isn't the case.

> ** Seems the objection to the FPCA is not that they don't want to sign
> the FPCA but that it's "hard" to sign the FPCA
> *** Would it be better to address those specific usability problems?

My concerns as I clarified several times had nothing to do with usability.

> *** In the US, at least, there's only minimal rights associated with
> things that have no license, therefore, we would be on shakey legal
> grounds if we accepted contributions without license terms

Yet this routinely happens. Patches contributed via bugzilla or ones
that contributors pick from mailing lists etc. FPCA can only cover a
subset of these where the patch contributor is also a Fedora contributor
.In any case, since the board seems uninterested in the issues I
raised. I will drop this discussion.

Rahul


_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:50 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org