Re: Evolution copyright assignment: Storm in a teacup

I don't want to be the one saying it, but; chill down the tone, please.

It is not aimed at anyone participating in the discussion, but I do
beleive it's a storm in a teacup as Jeff says.

Although, there must also be an understanding that the GPL and the
copyright assignment aren't unrelated as such, since Novell will release
the transfered software under the GPL _and_ any licence they wish. I
understand that it's a problem to contribute to something when one wants
to keep ones code out of proprietary territory. This doesn't
nescessarily go against Novell, or Evolution, but it's just a fact that
someone wants it one way, and someone wants it the other. So you have a
choice: Contribute, or don't. If there is sufficient pressuer or loss of
developer base, maybe Novell will accept further limiting clauses to the
transfer - or maybe they won't. That is a decision on their part, not

People have all their right to say what they mean, but I expect people
to respect contrary opinions. In the end, Evolution is Free Software,
and released under the GPL. That means it should not be kept out of the
Desktop, IMO. But in the end, I do believe it's up to the Release Team,
that is a part of our representative democracy, to decide what is right
to include and what's not. Someone will dislike the decision, but
there's no way to please everyone in this matter.

With this, I close this discussion from my end. Hopefully, we can accept
the fact that disagreements always will exist, and close down the
discussion as a whole.


fre, 06.08.2004 kl. 20.11 +0100, skrev Rui Miguel Seabra:
> On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 11:58 -0700, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > <quote who="Rui Miguel Seabra">
> > > It's supposed to be GPL, not GPL, or anything else.
> > 
> > > So you consider acceptable to include as an official module one with a
> > > licensing scheme created with the purpose of circunventing the GPL?
> > 
> > I am not convinced you understand the discussion or issues at hand.
> And I reject your dismissiveness.
> >                                                                      You seem
> > to think copyright assignment and the GPL are somehow related. They are not.
> But one can be, and is, used with the intention of cirunventing the
> other.
> > Perhaps you should refrain from posting until you have some context on what
> > we are discussing here.
> Perhaps you should refrain your blind trust and use an analytical
> insight. Instead of a problem in need of solving, you react as if my
> intention was attacking a project (that I love to use) and its
> developers.
> Rui
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dette er en digitalt signert meldingsdel

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]