Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-14 Thread Francesco Poli
On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 10:29:23 +0800 Paul Wise wrote: [...] > Personally, I trust the FSF, as a non-profit public interest charity, > to be a good copyright steward for Free Software code [...] Personally, I don't. The FSF has, in my own humble opinion, a bad track record of publishing and/or

Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-12 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Frederic Bonnard wrote: > I've got more details about the agreements : > "libvecpf was created with the intention of being integrated later to glibc. > glibc islicensed under LGPL and, as a GNU/FSF project, requires copyright > assignment:

Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-12 Thread Frederic Bonnard
Hi, I've got more details about the agreements : "libvecpf was created with the intention of being integrated later to glibc. glibc islicensed under LGPL and, as a GNU/FSF project, requires copyright assignment: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.en.html Thus, libvecpf is also licensed as

Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-09 Thread Ian Jackson
Ben Finney writes ("Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement"): > Frederic Bonnard <fre...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > > My best option is, indeed, to ask to remove those agreements from the > > source. > > It can often be effective to of

Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-08 Thread Ben Finney
Frederic Bonnard writes: > Though, as Ian mentionned, and as I intuitively felt, I still think > there are unpleasant conditions in this agreement, in respect to the > social contract will of giving back to the community, amongst others. > It's a real stymie. Yes,

Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-08 Thread Ian Jackson
Frederic Bonnard writes ("Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement"): > Though, as Ian mentionned, and as I intuitively felt, I still think > there are unpleasant conditions in this agreement, in respect to the > social contract will of giving back to the

Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-08 Thread Frederic Bonnard
17:01:21 +0100, Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: > Frederic Bonnard writes ("[Individual|Corporate] Contributor License > Agreement"): > > I'm wondering if an agreement meets the DFSG during the packaging > > process of a library c

Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-07 Thread Ben Finney
Frederic Bonnard writes: > I'm wondering if an agreement meets the DFSG during the packaging > process of a library called libvecpf. Thanks for raising this while doing the packaging work, it is important to get this right. > It's under GPLv2.1+ but there are 2

Re: [Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-07 Thread Ole Streicher
Hi Frederic, these agreements seem to cover how one may contribute the code back upstream. I think that upstream is free to put any rules here -- there are upstreams that completely reject outside contributions, and other require a transfer of the copyright. Everyting is fine here. So, I would

[Individual|Corporate] Contributor License Agreement

2016-09-07 Thread Frederic Bonnard
Hi everybody, I'm wondering if an agreement meets the DFSG during the packaging process of a library called libvecpf. It's under GPLv2.1+ but there are 2 additional files which are agreements. Depending if you are an individual contributor or a corporate one : -