* Udo Spallek: " Re: [tryton-dev] contributions: approval rules" (Tue, 16 Dec 2014 13:06:20 +0100):
> As an old discussion I participated is *swimming up*, I would like to
> explain my opinion today.
> After the SCO-Linux controversies[3] I changed my opinion[4]
> in many of the proposals.
I am not really up-to-date with this subject, but AFAIS SCO was defeated on its
law suits? [A] And SCO attacked on the validty of the GPL itself, where we
can't do a lot?
> > - The contributor name must be the real name of the natural person
> > who submit the code
> > - The contributor email must be a valid email address
> > - The username of mercurial patch must be in the form:
> > Name <email>
>
> Today, I would strongly vote *yes* for the above proposals.
> Because it makes the project stronger in case of copyright questions.
> In my country the copyright of a creation is fixed to the natural
> persons who act as a creators.
> IANAL, but AFAIK in Germany the copyright is not transferable to anyone
> else (ยง 29 Abs. 1 UrhG).
> In other countries like USA it is different, the copyright is
> transferable even to legal person.
>
> I think it is good when the Tryton project is able to identify a
> natural or legal person as author.
> Additionally I find we need a sign-off process for contributors to the
> developer-certificate-of-origin[5], as many other projects do[6].
For me the situation is still the same as of our first discussions on this
subject.
- We shouldn't try to require arrangements, that we cannot enforce.
or the other way round
- If we require something, then we must enforce it correctly.
AFAIS in [B] it is said:
"... then you just add a line saying
Signed-off-by: ..."
There is nowhere said, that this commit has to be gpg signed. Perhaps this
document is not complete (and I currently don't have the time to investigate),
but this way you could just use any name. That's just snakeoil;) [C]
The only somewhat reliable process would be to require to sign commits etc.
with a key signed by at least (put in a number here) project members. I doubt
that this can be, what we want to simplify contribution.
So just today I even would be inclined to not vote for any of the
requirements in [D].
> [3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_controversies
> [4]http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.tryton/1591/
> [5]http://www.do-not-panic.com/2014/02/developer-certificate-of-origin.html
> [6]https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.en.html
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
[A]
http://www.zdnet.com/article/novell-defeats-sco-in-unix-copyright-case-3039288508/
[B] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
[C] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snakeoil
[D] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.tryton/1591/
--
Mathias Behrle
MBSolutions
Gilgenmatten 10 A
D-79114 Freiburg
Tel: +49(761)471023
Fax: +49(761)4770816
http://m9s.biz
UStIdNr: DE 142009020
PGP/GnuPG key availabable from any keyserver, ID: 0x8405BBF6
pgpGGFFRIviWn.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
