Stephen M. Webb: > I think you will find that there is no conflict between any vaguely > defined "social contract" and the requirements for acceptable code > submission to a software project.
That social contract is <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt>. David Alan Gilbert:
I don't think any reading of Alberto's mail is objecting to code review.
Exactly. Stephen M. Webb: > If you truly believe that the original works of an author or authors > belong not to them individually but to some larger collective, you > would probably be more effective talking to legislators to get the > copyright and patent laws in your local jurisdiction struck down, and > best of luck with that. Mean time we will continue asking the > authors of contributions to agree to share the specific rights in > their work if they want it accepted into a Canonical-led project. > That's the best way to guarantee fairness for everyone.Putting the agreement under the United Kingdom law wasn't my objection, but to take nearly unlimited power over the code.
Stephen M. Webb: > If you could enumerate the abuses engendered by asking for a grant of > license I'd be happy to address them individually.As I said, this is like telling a autocracy is good because their drivers have never done something bad.
It's something that elicits distrust itself, and usually finishes with people working less and less for the project; even when they are paid for it.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~papercuts-ninja Post to : papercuts-ninja@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~papercuts-ninja More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
