From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Karl Fogel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: On the subject of Git, Bazaar, and the future of Emacs development Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 14:27:39 -0500 Message-ID: <87a9pg7mxg.fsf@floss.red-bean.com> References: <20130401202613.0b4201e3@anarchist> <87li91nmhp.fsf@gnu.org> <87ip45hseu.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: Karl Fogel NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364930872 11510 80.91.229.3 (2 Apr 2013 19:27:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 19:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jay Belanger Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 02 21:28:20 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UN6sV-0006BQ-3T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:28:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53785 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN6s6-0002AD-4t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:27:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57825) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN6ry-0002A7-I2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:27:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN6ru-00020X-HF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:27:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yh0-x22d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22d]:40550) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UN6ru-00020B-DI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:27:42 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-yh0-f45.google.com with SMTP id i21so114666yha.4 for ; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:27:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:reply-to:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=ZI1Tf/9+1exnGrec0JoVVmjOecZcX2F8FxSo35Mr/PQ=; b=nFwAfqcnfChwBGTNmZnAEeoFEui1QdmpjZIlUTxLIrm8BdQMRVFf3IONg4Q8/YUQfh hlMrap2OxPehdLF4lMRDhe2MoGieIK72T1+u+05h9DCcGRcI1QlcHrYBAWj9M0RWEjs3 vLixChLh0tuidlrl5mdYy6NQlRntmbMTlXg5O3IXBEz5MIOMeYpd0dPXPkl5O5SaO6dQ WAItMb07IdcweBjZtwvaLNpy+aMyEmQPgwF4fLxEbj8P6MxvqSBlqrSM287+cqkLk3Fq TVtwUofTUAO7AEhGRt9yvGvcBrnV1DxIfmS/jFFsjV8sK1G1WbZNl+v+uiaXymHea99R hwPA== X-Received: by 10.236.84.81 with SMTP id r57mr16185681yhe.33.1364930861795; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from floss.red-bean.com (64-145-114-106.client.dsl.net. [64.145.114.106]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f70sm4979436yhi.12.2013.04.02.12.27.40 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Apr 2013 12:27:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87ip45hseu.fsf@gmail.com> (Jay Belanger's message of "Tue, 02 Apr 2013 10:19:05 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22d X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:158564 Archived-At: Jay Belanger writes: >> Not that onerous? The Canonical Individual Contributor License >> Agreement requires you to explicitly authorise Canonical to license the >> contributed software under a proprietary license. See section 2.3 of >> the agreement. > >I don't know if onerous is the right word, but I find this incredibly >surprising. There is a GNU project where, if you want to contribute, >you have to explicitly say that your contributions can be put under a >proprietary license. >Why would this be a GNU project? Well, you have to agree that your contributions can be *non-exclusively* put under a proprietary license. Canonical's contributer agreement for Bzr does not take away your ability to use and license your changes; it merely _also_ grants Canonical the right to distribute them in some ways that you might not otherwise permit by default. So all it really does is open up an entity-specific exception to your enforcement ability. IMHO, the contributor agreement isn't a reason for or against Bzr being a GNU Project. But I'm not crystal clear on what it means to be a GNU project, other than agreeing to say publicly "We are a GNU Project" and be licensed under the GPL. -K