Re: Proposals for mono-basic and monodoc

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

 





On 11/6/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>> Not all projects have a single entity holding all the copyrights on it.
>
> All "official" GNU software is copyright by the FSF.  They could turn
> around and license future glibc versions under the GPL (or even GPLv3),
> elimating much of the distribution.

Not all of them.

>
> Is it worth worrying about _possible_ future license changes?

You trimmed out the rest of what I said which missed the point. If the
software is under GPL, there is already a patent defense provision in
it. Context is important.

   It
> certainly is something to keep in mind, but I don't know that it should
> be the top thing.
>
> This does poibt out a good reason to not assign copyrights to others; I
> have never done that on my (mostly minor) patches to Open Source
> software.

Copyright assignment can be very beneficial to a project in many other
cases.

Rahul

--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list


Back in the day, mpackage.org was setup, how about pushing all *mono* stuff to it, and clearing Fedora of any issues that might come up?


-- 
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: 
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Photo Sharing]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]