On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 07:24:30AM -0700, Eric Pruitt wrote: > On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 10:10:21AM +0200, Silvan Jegen wrote: > > I do it to indicate that I agree with the licensing terms of the > > existing code and to make explicit that I want to let you use this > > code (that to my best knowledge is of my own devising, does not > > infringe any patents yaddayaddayadda...). That is what the Linux > > kernel people use this tag for[0]. > > How does that indicate you agree with the terms? If you aren't GPG > signing the commits, that message adds no additional insurance that you > are actually the author of the commit; anyone can add that line to the > patch if they so desire.
Sure, but why would they? To indicate that I contributed the code? Worst case I can deny it and it would be a patt situation. I'm not a lawyer (thank god) but it seems to me like the legal status of email is a murky topic anyway. I don't assume that all email archives used in court are without exception stemming from non-forgeable email addresses for example (though I would certainly hope so)... What I am doing with this tag is expressing my good intentions. > > If you prefer me not to do it, I won't in the future. > > I don't even have commit privileges to any of the suckless repositories, > so it's not up to me. This was more directed at the people on the list in general. I don't feel strongly either way (especially since I am located in Europe where software patents are not legally binding anyways AFAIK). Cheers, Silvan
