I don't have a project at c-l.net, but ... On 2006-02-24, Erik Enge wrote: > On 2/24/06, Nikodemus Siivola wrote: >> (2) I agree with the basic issue. I think a reasonable approach in >> case of clnet would be to make a fair effort to reach the >> original owner, and give him ample time (say a year) to >> respond. If he doesn't respond tar up the project as owned by >> him, and move the ownership to the intrepid taker-ower. If he >> is ever back and upset, explain the situation hand over the >> original tarball and offer to reinstate it as the project in >> question moving the interim stuff elsewhere. > > Yes. Please CC [EMAIL PROTECTED] as you are mailing the owner to document > that you have tried to reach him over a period of time. I think a > year is stretching it but I'd like to see at least a month without > any communication before we regard him as having no interest in the > project's future.
... a month sounds like a good time to me. Maybe you could say that you won't give away any package that has a page update or cvs commit less than six months old. After that, they still get the "try to reach by email for one month" waiting period, and then it's open season. That said, I guess one could still not care for an author's progress or direction, and fork the project. -- L _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
