Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
"Give back"? "Credit" is more what comes to mind.
"back" was a typo, sorry.
In any event, from section 3.3 I got that CVS would do for tracking changes, but I didn't get the message that it constitutes "credit". I can't see how that could be. If I give you a file, and you put it in CVS, how does that give me credit?
Your company would be credited, as I wrote before. I'd be happy to credit the original author. Credit, to restate, is not advertising.
Please state exactly in which way you plan to give credit.
I accept that some people dislike the JCA's provisions: you, for instance. Others are not so offended.
I never said I find the JCA "offensive". What I did say is that I'm put off by how you try to sell it. Your approach doesn't exactly make me wnat to sign it. I was simply suggesting that you re-consider your approach. That is all.
A great concession from Sun? That is an odd interpretation and not one that is meant.
But that is the message you get accross. You just latch onto the point that I get to keep copyright over my own work, as if that had been into question and should be glad. How would you feel if I suggested you make me co-owner of your car (ie. one you bought yourself), and then insist that it's okay because you'd still be own too. That argument wouldn't make you want to give me co-ownership of your car. You'd probably also think I was a very silly person for making the suggestion.
In any event, I won't dwell on that point. How you choose to try to convince people to sign the JCA is up to you. I'm giving you advice with the best of intentions. It's up to you if you want to follow it.
From our perspective the issue is not the JCA. I have not encountered, save for yourself, any programmer who would refuse to donate code *because* of the JCA.
Consider the posibility that those who might exist will not spend nearly as much time as I have trying to explain this very simple concept. Or that they might be put-off as soon as they read the licensing FAQ. Or that you might not know very many outside programmers. That is, if your use OOo itself as your pool, obviously you'll have a biased sample. In any event, I believe I'm not the only one, and I have given a basis for that opinion. But briefly (1) I know several other people (though only of them can program) that feel similarly about the JCA, (2) I follow FOSS forums and I see a deep mistrust of Sun, (3) Most FOSS projects choose the one license that does not permit companies from making propietary products (GPL). You may recall that I suggested that a way to make the JCA more appealing could be to have an agreement from Sun that the contribution would /only/ be released under [insert license].
Cheers, Daniel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
