Re: Thanks, and a Brief Survey

[Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>]

Hey,

Le dimanche 17 janvier 2010, à 15:56 -0500, john palmieri a écrit :
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Luis Villa <luis tieguy org> wrote:
> > It has been pointed out that in fact it has been written down:
> > http://live.gnome.org/ProjectPrerequisites

Those are prerequisites for project that people want to host on the
GNOME infrastructure. This has been written by the sysadmin team.

[...]

> The release team goes further for official modules and states:
> 
> Free-ness: Apps must be under a Free or Open license and support open
> standards and protocols. In case of doubt about the module license, send an
> email to the Release Team and the desktop-devel mailing list. Support of
> proprietary protocols and closed standards is part of the world we live in,
> but all applications that support closed protocols should also support open
> equivalents where those exist, and should default to those if at all
> possible while still serving their intended purpose.
> 
> http://live.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning/ModuleProposing#judgement-criteria

This comes from the release team, and this is what Luis helped write.
It's actually pasted from GEP-10:
  http://developer.gnome.org/gep/gep-10.html

(I prefer to ignore the "free" vs "open source" vs "free/open source" vs
"free and open source" vs... topic for now, until I read all mails and
make sure I don't say stuff already mentioned)

On a general note, it might make sense to create a page listing the
licenses we're usually using in the project, and in which case to use
them. And list this license page from those ProjectPrerequisites and
ModuleProposing. I'd love to have something like
http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy for GNOME. Is there
anyone who would like to work on this?

Vincent

-- 
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.