On Sun, 28 Sep 2003, Robert Millan wrote: > > Assigning copyright and being given CVS access is not necessarily related:
For any substantial updates, copyright is certainly the driving issue. > - If you send too many patches for review without having CVS access, then you > might consider assigning copyright so that you can send more patches for > review. The FSF guidelines specify allow to 14 lines of *total* contribution from an author without copyright assignment. It doesn't take many small patches to reach this level. > - Sometimes GNU maintainers agree to give you CVS access before the actual > paper signing process is complete, provided that you agree not to commit > more code of your own than you're allowed to. (this is my current situation > with GNU GRUB, for example). I believe that this practice is contrary to the agreement we sign with the FSF. If word-of-mouth and personal trust was sufficient, then there would be no need for paper contracts. The SCO/Linux situation is evidence that these are not minor issues. > Scott: IMO all Debian maintainers of GNU software should do this as part of > their maintaining task. Please request assigning copyright for past and future > changes to libtool by emailing "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". Very good idea. However, always keep in mind that if someone sends a patch to a person with signed paperwork, then the recipient is not the author of the patch and the situation has not significantly improved. Bob ====================================== Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
