Re: Do you recognize these modules?

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Noah Lavine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com> writes:

>>> Luckily, I haven't actually started the rewrite, because I also have
>>> limited time to work on this. So I'm very glad to hear that you're
>>> interested in transfering them. If you are the only author of the
>>> pieces, then I think the transfer is simple - you put the FSF
>>> copyright notice at the top, and you're done.
>>
>> Uh no.  You can't just assign copyright to somebody without asking them,
>> much like you can't just assign parentship to somebody without asking
>> them.
>
> Yes, this was specific to this situation, because I thought that he
> had already signed a copyright assignment form. I don't mean this as a
> general statement of when you can make changes to Guile.
>
>> Since Thien-Thi Nguyen assigned copyright to GOOPS and general changes
>> to future changes to GUILE to the FSF in 2000 already, it is more or
>> less a matter of him checking in the changes or otherwise contributing
>> them in a manner making clear that the contribution is intentional.
>> Matching copyright headers are obviously a good indicator for that.
>
> Ah, so he would have to either check them in himself or send them as
> patches to the list, correct? (In addition to the assignment.)

The assignment is the formal part.  The rest is just a matter of making
sure that "but I never intended you to take _that_" does not come up.
So it is always safer if a contributor _gives_ stuff himself (or
designates them) rather than if someone else _takes_ it from him on the
assumption that this was intended to be taken.

Like if you have a contract for buying a horse.  If you take it from the
barn and later the owner says "You took the halter!  I did not sell the
halter!" that's a worse situation to be in rather than if he handed you
the horse including halter, even though the halter is not in the
contract.

Frankly, in the given situation I should be rather surprised if there
was potential for misunderstandings.  It does look like both the intent
to contribute as well as the compass of the contribution are quite
well-understood.

-- 
David Kastrup