Charles Bailey wrote:
> I'd hoped to encourage review, rather than put it off.
Clearly, you succeeded, given Philip's in-depth response :-)!
Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> writes:
> Charles Bailey <bailey.charles@gmail.com> writes:
> > to presume. Is it acceptable to clone the copyright from an existing
> > file? Does
> > that suffice to Collabnet as assignment of copyright?
>
> I think so.
Yes, it is. That's how we've done it in the past.
> > Do I have a pledge from
> > Collabnet that any code whose copyright is assigned in this way will
> > remain freely
> > available in perpetuity? (By "freely available", I mean terms
> > substantially identical
> > to Subversion's current licensing; I'm not trying to start a skirmish
> > over software
> > licensing.)
>
> I can't speak for CollabNet, but I'll point out that the Subversion
> licence is not a copyleft licence and so anyone, including CollabNet,
> can make a proprietary version.
Neither CollabNet nor anyone else can ever remove this code from the
open-source world, once it's under this license. Someone could take a
*copy* of the code and put it into a closed project, but that wouldn't
affect the continued freedom of the original from which the copy came.
So I think you don't have anything to worry about.
Best,
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jun 22 23:10:59 2005