Re: Evolution copyright assignment: Storm in a teacup



This was meant for foundation-list; sorry.

Chris

fre, 06.08.2004 kl. 21.21 +0200, skrev Christoffer Olsen:
> I don't want to be the one saying it, but; chill down the tone, please.
> 
> It is not aimed at anyone participating in the discussion, but I do
> beleive it's a storm in a teacup as Jeff says.
> 
> Although, there must also be an understanding that the GPL and the
> copyright assignment aren't unrelated as such, since Novell will release
> the transfered software under the GPL _and_ any licence they wish. I
> understand that it's a problem to contribute to something when one wants
> to keep ones code out of proprietary territory. This doesn't
> nescessarily go against Novell, or Evolution, but it's just a fact that
> someone wants it one way, and someone wants it the other. So you have a
> choice: Contribute, or don't. If there is sufficient pressuer or loss of
> developer base, maybe Novell will accept further limiting clauses to the
> transfer - or maybe they won't. That is a decision on their part, not
> ours.
> 
> People have all their right to say what they mean, but I expect people
> to respect contrary opinions. In the end, Evolution is Free Software,
> and released under the GPL. That means it should not be kept out of the
> Desktop, IMO. But in the end, I do believe it's up to the Release Team,
> that is a part of our representative democracy, to decide what is right
> to include and what's not. Someone will dislike the decision, but
> there's no way to please everyone in this matter.
> 
> With this, I close this discussion from my end. Hopefully, we can accept
> the fact that disagreements always will exist, and close down the
> discussion as a whole.
> 
> Christoffer
> 
> fre, 06.08.2004 kl. 20.11 +0100, skrev Rui Miguel Seabra:
> > On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 11:58 -0700, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > > <quote who="Rui Miguel Seabra">
> > > > It's supposed to be GPL, not GPL, or anything else.
> > > 
> > > > So you consider acceptable to include as an official module one with a
> > > > licensing scheme created with the purpose of circunventing the GPL?
> > > 
> > > I am not convinced you understand the discussion or issues at hand.
> > 
> > And I reject your dismissiveness.
> > 
> > >                                                                      You seem
> > > to think copyright assignment and the GPL are somehow related. They are not.
> > 
> > But one can be, and is, used with the intention of cirunventing the
> > other.
> > 
> > > Perhaps you should refrain from posting until you have some context on what
> > > we are discussing here.
> > 
> > Perhaps you should refrain your blind trust and use an analytical
> > insight. Instead of a problem in need of solving, you react as if my
> > intention was attacking a project (that I love to use) and its
> > developers.
> > 
> > Rui
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-list mailing list
> > foundation-list gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dette er en digitalt signert meldingsdel



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]