From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24130 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2003 13:36:53 -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 24123 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2003 13:36:53 -0000 Message-ID: <3E8C38F1.2070702@eCosCentric.com> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 13:36:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Larmour User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030314 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Salter Cc: ecos-maintainers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Pros and cons of FSF References: <3E8BB24E.7080107@eCosCentric.com> <20030403130759.C9A3C78849@deneb.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20030403130759.C9A3C78849@deneb.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00012.txt.bz2 Mark Salter wrote: >>>>>>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. It depends on the exact text certainly, because the default FSF assignment form explicitly lists the "Program" covered. Jifl -- eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts --[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]-- --[ can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln ]-- Opinions==mine