From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30362 invoked by alias); 17 Dec 2002 16:38:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-maintainers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-maintainers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 30330 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 16:38:57 -0000 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:38:00 -0000 From: Andrew Lunn To: Jonathan Larmour Cc: eCos Maintainers Subject: Re: Future code ownership Message-ID: <20021217163838.GB1044@biferten.ma.tech.ascom.ch> References: <3DFDF6B7.8090008@jifvik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3DFDF6B7.8090008@jifvik.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Filter-Version: 1.6 (ascomax) X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2 > 1) No copyright assignments at all. This is like the Linux kernel. The > admin overhead is reduced, as well as the hassle factor for contributors. > However the ownership of the code is called into question, and there is a > risk that code that is contributed may not be the copyright owners - think > of the corporate disclaimer thing we have. Certainly the FSF are against > it for these types of reasons, and they are the acknowledged experts in > this field. Once this decision is made it can never be revoked. Definitely > no potential licence revenue. I don't think assignments are that much of a burden on the contributer, but i would try to ensure its a case of sign it once, it lasts indefinatly. Having to redo the assignment everytime was APITA. We know RH had the infrastucture in place to handle these assignments. What about the other options. Does SPI Inc already have this infrastructure? Do any of its other projects require such assignments? How quickly are they processed? Andrew