From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14929 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2003 13:08:04 -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 14921 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2003 13:08:04 -0000 From: Mark Salter To: jifl@eCosCentric.com Cc: ecos-maintainers@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <3E8BB24E.7080107@eCosCentric.com> (message from Jonathan Larmour on Thu, 03 Apr 2003 05:02:22 +0100) Subject: Re: Pros and cons of FSF References: <3E8BB24E.7080107@eCosCentric.com> Message-Id: <20030403130759.C9A3C78849@deneb.localdomain> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 13:08:00 -0000 X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 >>>>> Jonathan Larmour writes: > * An unanswered question: will Red Hat developers need to make sure there > is an assignment to the FSF? Or will it be okay to just do stuff since > there's already more than enough RH copyright so a little more won't make > much difference. I suspect the FSF may insist on the former, but if so, > would that be acceptable to Red Hat? This may make life very difficult for > developers in Red Hat :-|. I think all Red Hat employees are covered by a blanket assignment to FSF. I'll check to make sure. --Mark