Hi Frederic, these agreements seem to cover how one may contribute the code back upstream. I think that upstream is free to put any rules here -- there are upstreams that completely reject outside contributions, and other require a transfer of the copyright. Everyting is fine here.
So, I would not see any reason why these rules would make the license non-DFSG. Cheers Ole Frederic Bonnard <fre...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > Hi everybody, > I'm wondering if an agreement meets the DFSG during the packaging > process of a library called libvecpf. It's under GPLv2.1+ but there are > 2 additional files which are agreements. > Depending if you are an individual contributor or a corporate one : > - https://github.com/Libvecpf/libvecpf/blob/master/ICLA.txt > - https://github.com/Libvecpf/libvecpf/blob/master/CCLA.txt > > I see amongst some problems with : > - contributor must fill, sign and send the agreement > - reveal his identity > - notify the Libvecpf Maintainer of any facts or circumstances of which You > become aware that would make these representations inaccurate in any > respect. > > Can anybody confirm those points ? (maybe others ?) > If so, what could be changed to make it DFSG compliant ? > Thanks for any help. > Regards, > > F.
