On 9/27/07, R P Herrold <herrold@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Your gut may need a check-up -- as noted in IRC to you several > days ago, CLA 5 includes the representation: Selectively cutting of my post like you have done isn't moving the conversation forward. Though I must admit, if I had such a proud family history to tout, I'd make it a point to bring it up quite frequently. Me, I've got generations and generations of Slavic organized crime on one side and Carolinian pirateers on the other. Based on my family history, everyone reading this should check to make sure that I haven't picked their pockets, broken their kneecaps, and then buried their family's best silver out on the outer banks somewhere. And when not being compelled by the unquenchable inherited bloodlust flowing through my veins to do these sorts of things against my will, I'm out kicking puppies for fun. It's a simple statement of fact that my very existence is an affront to the patriotic nobility of your bloodline. But, you'll be glad to know that I am in therapy and I'm learning to accept my inherently evil nature and learning to cope.. day by day. Did you fail to read the very next hypothetical question i posed concerning my gut feeling on attribution? I know my posts are long, but it really does help if you read all of it. I think you you read way too much into the first hypothetical that gets clarified in the second. But for the sake of clarity, I'll take a moment to be explicit. I think regardless of what is technically required by the copyright license applicable to individual spec files, 'we' should be attributing the original location/source/person that our spec file is based on. The question is what is the best way to do it. Am I to take your response that you would prefer Fedora to implement a policy that uses an initial changelog entry to note spec file heritage? When I asked exactly that question in IRC, I failed to receive an answer, so to be sure, I'll ask again. Is a comment in the initial changelog entry at fedora package submission time the way you would prefer to see attribution handled for re-worked spec files? My concern with relying on changelogs to preserve information as to origin of pilfered booty..arr..spec files is that changelogs will not be protected for the life of the fedora project. To save space, packages with exceeding long changelog histories may be pruned at some point in the future. So I'm not sure that the first changelog entry is the the most appropriate place to encode attribution. -jef"only one week until the fall curling season starts!!!"spasleta _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
