On Wednesday 04 July 2007, David Landgren wrote: > Shlomi Fish wrote: > > Hello CPAN Cabalists! > > There is no cabal. >
Correction: there is no IGLU Cabal! ;-) http://www.hackers.org.il/mediawiki/index.php/The_mysterious_IGLU_Cabal http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/fortunes/tinic Seriously now - how am I supposed to call the core CPAN administrators? I once referred to them as the "CPAN gods" but was told that it's inappropriate. Now I'm told that "CPAN Cabalists" is also wrong. Is "CPAN admins" good enough? > > Since I last talked to you about XML-SemanticDiff (on 10 June - > > http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.modules/2007/06/msg54811.html ), I've > > continued working on my own fork of it here: > > > > http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/web-cpan/XML-SemanticDiff/trunk/ > > > > It now fixes all the bugs here: > > > > http://rt.cpan.org/Dist/Display.html?Queue=XML-SemanticDiff > > Well done! > > [...] > Thanks. > > So I ask the CPAN cabalists for me to become a co-maintainer of the > > module, so I can: > > > > 1. Upload my modified version to the CPAN. > > > > 2. Close the bugs for it on rt.cpan.org. > > > > 3. Perhaps enhance or correct it further into the future. > > > > And by that fix XML-SemanticDiff which is important and heavily needs an > > update. > > That's for sure. My only question concerns the license. I see that the > previous version was licensed under the same terms as Perl itself. Will > you continue to do as well, or do you plan to change it to your UCLA > license? > Well, I'm not familiar with a licence called the "UCLA licence". I'm normally using the MIT/X11 Licence (sometimes referred to as "the MIT Licence"). I assume that's what you meant. I have no plans of switching the distribution to the MIT/X11 licence. If I'm planning on using the original code, I am not allowed to do so, because the originator of the code licensed them under the GPL and (original) Artistic licences. Both of these licences are recursive, and do not allow relicensing under a different licence in a derived work. The only way to do it, is to rewrite the code under a different licence. What I am doing is disclaiming any implicit or explicit ownership on my modifications, and am assigning the full rights of them to the originator. Thus, if he ever resurfaces, he could re-licence the most up-to-date code without a need for my approval. Regards, Shlomi Fish --------------------------------------------------------------------- Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/ If it's not in my E-mail it doesn't happen. And if my E-mail is saying one thing, and everything else says something else - E-mail will conquer. -- An Israeli Linuxer
