On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 01:05 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Anthony, > > People who are willing to go the GPL route for their code have lots of > avenues as u know...
(It's not the GPL, it's the GNU Classpath license!) The point of my request is to make sure contributors are informed. Of course, I'm working under the assumption that GNU Classpath is important to the Harmony project. Perhaps it isn't. But, if it is, I think it makes sense to inject some advertising for GNU Classpath into the Harmony contribution process, because that will be the most convenient time for people to consider and arrange for dual licensing. AG > -- dims > > On 11/18/05, Anthony Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 00:48 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > > that's the prerogative of the contributor... > > > > No, I'm asking that the Harmony contribution process include a step > > asking the contributor to dual license their code (along with the > > reasoning). And then the contributor can make an informed decision at > > an appropriate time. > > > > AG > > > > > > > -- dims > > > > > > On 11/18/05, Anthony Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 00:36 -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > > > > Anthony, > > > > > > > > > > Am sure you are aware that Apache does not get contributors to assign > > > > > copyrights to Apache when they contribute code. > > > > > > > > So why not simply have the Harmony contribution paperwork ask > > > > contributors to dual license their code under both the Apache and GNU > > > > Classpath licenses? > > > > > > > > AG > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/ > > > > > > > -- > Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
