Zach Welch
2003-08-25 22:20:11 UTC
Hi all, (repost that bounced here - twice)
After several delays, the board has met and voted on some initial
matters. Instead of my typical long winded fashion, I'm breaking them
out into bits and pieces. Here's the first.
The matters Contributor Licensing Agreements, dual-licensing, and other
similar matters have been put on hold indefinitely. These things don't
matter for our initial work on the distribution anyway, and the forked
tree (and its surrounding tools) will remain GPL.
New works will be treated on a per-case basis, and the authors of those
works may choose to allow the foundation to use CLAs - or not. The
foundation will not force contributors to sign CLAs for new works, and
the package authors may choose to do whatever they want with their works.
If such terms are not acceptable, the authors should simply encourage
the development of an alternative; however, the foundation will not
blanket its members with licenses that may have no bearing on their
contributions. Pardon me, folks, I'm still learning here.
If someday the foundation can afford to pay for new works to be created,
the community of members will need to consider the options for the most
approriate open source license (perhaps still the GPL) and whether or
not CLAs are desired for that project. Until that day comes, we are
putting these matters aside and looking forward to getting more
important things done.
Cheers,
Zach
After several delays, the board has met and voted on some initial
matters. Instead of my typical long winded fashion, I'm breaking them
out into bits and pieces. Here's the first.
The matters Contributor Licensing Agreements, dual-licensing, and other
similar matters have been put on hold indefinitely. These things don't
matter for our initial work on the distribution anyway, and the forked
tree (and its surrounding tools) will remain GPL.
New works will be treated on a per-case basis, and the authors of those
works may choose to allow the foundation to use CLAs - or not. The
foundation will not force contributors to sign CLAs for new works, and
the package authors may choose to do whatever they want with their works.
If such terms are not acceptable, the authors should simply encourage
the development of an alternative; however, the foundation will not
blanket its members with licenses that may have no bearing on their
contributions. Pardon me, folks, I'm still learning here.
If someday the foundation can afford to pay for new works to be created,
the community of members will need to consider the options for the most
approriate open source license (perhaps still the GPL) and whether or
not CLAs are desired for that project. Until that day comes, we are
putting these matters aside and looking forward to getting more
important things done.
Cheers,
Zach