On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 01:56:56PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 10:50:52AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Just to cheerfully derail this for a bit - I doubt the usual case is > > that the people checking in the patches are also the ones who created > > them. I know that I more often check in a patch from somewhere else - > > usually upstream - than ones I wrote. > > > [snip analysis of what the FPCA has in this area] > > > > So, is the FPCA really giving us much in this context, which may be the > > most common context for patch contributions? Or are we still more or > > less just relying on everyone doing the decent thing? If I understand the question correctly, the FPCA is not supposed to cover such patch contributions at all. Feature, not bug. > And on the other side of this coin, do we want to force maintainers to hunt > down authors of patches posted on upstream mailing lists and get them to > explicitly license these things so that the maintainers can then add them > to our packages with the explicit license or do we want the FPCA to > establish responsibility for this? Again, the FPCA isn't supposed to cover this. Feature, not bug. (Nor do I expect maintainers to ensure explicit licensing of upstream patches, though there's nothing wrong with doing that.) - RF _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
