On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 11:24, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > Hi, > Okay, this is an interesting discussion but lets try and get some sort > of resolution. What are people saying here? > > 1) Evolution should drop its Copyright assignment policy before > it can be considered for inclusion > > 2) A module without Copyright assignment is generally less hassle for > everyone but its not something which need block an otherwise > acceptable module from being included > > If people are seriously suggesting the former, then lets have that > discussion - otherwise lets move the discussion about Copyright > assignment policies in GNOME to fonudation-list where the discussion has > happened (but never concluded) before. From the `What is GNOME' web site: "GNOME is Free Software and part of the GNU project". For me this includes that GNOME should be released under the GPL (and libraries possibly under the LGPL, although I would prefer the GPL for them too.) I have no problem with copyright assignments if it is reasonably guaranteed that the code will only be released under the GPL. This is essentially guaranteed when assigning copyright to the FSF. To me it is a problem with assignment to a company who has even stated that they want to use the code in proprietary products. This has nothing to do with `blocking' evolution, but only whether it is to be included into GNOME or whether one should consider a different mail program. Andreas -- Prof. Dr. Andreas J. Guelzow Dept. of Mathematical & Computing Sciences Concordia University College of Alberta
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part