> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 3:06 AM
> From: "Thomas Rodgers"
> To: "Jonathan Wakely"
> Cc: "Jonathan Wakely via Gcc"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On 2021-04-18 23:29, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2021, 02:41 Frosku, wrote:
> >
> > On Sun Apr 18, 2021
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 3:47 PM
> From: "Frosku"
> To: "Thomas Rodgers" , "Jonathan Wakely"
>
> Cc: "Jonathan Wakely via Gcc"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On Mon Apr 19, 2021 at 4:06 PM BST, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
> > Google doesn't pay anybody to work on GCC all day.
Obviously the dude was not Eric Raymond, because he would have sent the
IBM Fuckhead an appropriate reply. These are the developers at IBM,
who after being watched by the IBM Panopticon, they obey!
Now repeat after me,
"Whenever I hear the voice say,
'Now, listen to me, ' I will obey."
"When I he
You got to understand what an employee 100% of the time means.
It means to be 100% Employer-Owned - It is the Culture of Ownership.
But the tyrannical double standard do-gooders and the continued pretense
that they're trying to help people in this society (e.g. women,
minorities, free software, et
compatible license without
requiring
copyright.
- Christopher Dimech
Society has became too quick to pass judgement and declare someone Persona
Non-Grata,
the most extreme form of censure a country can bestow.
In a new era of destructive authoritarianism, I support Richard Stallman.
Times of
port that piece of code for some particular reason, he
should be
able to do it. A free software license should not stop us from using the code,
whether he
died or not. Indeed the licensing is there to avoid such problems. It is also
legally
enforceable. It was one of wy arguments in favour.
ersonally I think that while assignment is a PITA and I wish it were
> easier, it is extremely valuable and provides a lot of flexibility, and
> shouldn't be abandoned without very, VERY careful consideration.
>
> And, that decision and those considerations should be documented and
&g
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2021 at 4:24 AM
> From: "Maciej W. Rozycki"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "Paul Koning" , "Jakub Jelinek"
> , "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: Update to GCC copyright assignment policy
>
A file should be kept with the author name, date and changes done by each
contributor.
Including this is the source code would make the history too long. Otherwise,
such information
can be put at the end of the file.
- Christopher Dimech
Society has became too quick to pass judgement and
of the
> sources, but I suspect it will. A copyright assignment made to FSF (or
> another legal entity) prevents this complication from happening.
>
> Maciej
No. What the copyright holder can do is the re-license by any other license
he wants (even proprietary). But you can&#
the FSF is unskilled and unnecessary.
Much effort should rather be put upon doing real work, opposing the European
Union
Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market that came into force on 7
June
2019.
> > I would be happy to setup a shared copyright pool under the Conservancy
> > Copyleft
n to continue with the current system of copyright
assignment
to a single entity. And only allow the use of additional contributions for
unique and
special situations that arise. Because there could be a time where you would
not be
able to use that piece of code. The biggest problem is loos
he reality that many
business administrators have a grasping attitude towards
software, science, and knowledge in general, seeing any activity or
knowledge only as opportunities for unjust income, not as
opportunities to contribute to human knowledge.
Workers today have no rights in the new di
are Freedom Law Center has always sought to
resolve
licensing disputes amicably. On the other, the Software Freedom Conservancy
takes
much harder line against the noncompliance of licensing terms.
On August 26, 2016, Linus Torvalds stated that he found such type of lawyering
a nasty festering
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2021 at 6:10 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Jason Merrill"
> Cc: "Jakub Jelinek" , "gcc Mailing List"
> Subject: Re: Update to GCC copyright assignment policy
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> On June 7, 2021 5:24:12 PM UTC, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >
> > Why would someone bother to
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2021 at 2:17 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "David Edelsohn"
> Cc: "Jakub Jelinek" , "gcc Mailing List"
> Subject: Re: Update to GCC copyright assignment policy
>
> Hi David,
>
> On June 7, 2021 1:26:52 PM UTC, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >
> > > It's a breaking change,
was an announcement; the changes in the mission statement
> reflect the new reality introduced by that announcement:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-June/236182.html
>
> Siddhesh
>
- Christopher Dimech
Administrator General - Naiad Informatics - Gnu Project
Societ
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2021 at 3:26 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Richard Biener"
> Cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , "Valentino Giudice"
>
> Subject: Re: GCC Mission Statement
>
> Sure Richard, I know.
>
> On June 9, 2021 2:32:22 PM UTC, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > You are free to create "D
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2021 at 3:49 AM
> From: "Aaron Gyes via Gcc"
> To: "GCC Administrator via Gcc"
> Subject: Re: Mission Statement
>
> On Jun 9, 2021, at 8:30 AM, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> >
> > Besides inspiring a sceptic attit
- Christopher Dimech
Administrator General - Naiad Informatics - Gnu Project
Society has become too quick to pass judgement and declare someone
Persona Non-Grata, the most extreme form of censure a country can
bestow.
In a new era of destructive authoritarianism, I support Richard
Stallman
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2021 at 9:07 AM
> From: "Aaron Gyes via Gcc"
> To: "GCC Administrator via Gcc"
> Subject: Re: Mission Statement
>
> > In this state of making something right, and making
> > something wrong, there is no way for inclusiveness.
>
> Are you familiar with the tolerance para
101 - 121 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
