unofficial mirror of guile-devel@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
@ 2022-10-06 20:18 Ludovic Courtès
  2022-10-06 20:34 ` Jean Abou Samra
                   ` (4 more replies)
  0 siblings, 5 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2022-10-06 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: guile-devel; +Cc: Andy Wingo

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1970 bytes --]

Hello Guilers!

Until now, we required copyright for “legally significant¹”
contributions to Guile to be assigned to the Free Software Foundation
(FSF).  This requirement did not exist for code not initially written
for Guile—e.g., (ice-9 match), sxml-match, etc.  The purported advantage
of copyright assignment is described at
<https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html>.

Your unreachable-but-nonetheless-friendly co-maintainers, Andy Wingo and
myself, came to the conclusion that the cost/benefit ratio of mandatory
copyright assignment is not good for Guile.  Like other projects such as
GCC², we have decided to relax that policy.

Nothing changes for contributors who have already assigned copyright on
future changes to Guile to the FSF.

New contributors are encouraged to assign copyright to the FSF by
emailing them one of the forms at
<https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/plain/doc/Copyright/>,
especially if they intend to contribute significantly going forward.

New contributors may instead choose to not assign copyright to the FSF.
In that case, copyright on the new code is held by the contributor
themself or, possibly, by their employer—contributors who choose this
option are expected to clarify which of these two applies to their
situation.  A copyright line for the new copyright holder is added to
files modified in a “legally significant” way³.

Guile remains under the same license, the GNU Lesser General Public
License, version 3 or any later version; contributions are expected
under the same terms.

We hope this to be one of the changes that will make it easier to
contribute to Guile.

Let us know if you have any questions, and enjoy the good hack!

Ludo’ & Andy.

¹ https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Legally-Significant
² https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-June/236182.html
³ https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Copyright-Notices

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 853 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
  2022-10-06 20:18 Relaxing the copyright assignment policy Ludovic Courtès
@ 2022-10-06 20:34 ` Jean Abou Samra
  2022-10-06 20:59   ` Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
  2022-10-06 20:45 ` Thompson, David
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  4 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jean Abou Samra @ 2022-10-06 20:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ludovic Courtès, guile-devel; +Cc: Andy Wingo



Le 06/10/2022 à 22:18, Ludovic Courtès a écrit :
> Hello Guilers!
>
> Until now, we required copyright for “legally significant¹”
> contributions to Guile to be assigned to the Free Software Foundation
> (FSF).  This requirement did not exist for code not initially written
> for Guile—e.g., (ice-9 match), sxml-match, etc.  The purported advantage
> of copyright assignment is described at
> <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html>.
>
> Your unreachable-but-nonetheless-friendly co-maintainers, Andy Wingo and
> myself, came to the conclusion that the cost/benefit ratio of mandatory
> copyright assignment is not good for Guile.  Like other projects such as
> GCC², we have decided to relax that policy.
>
> Nothing changes for contributors who have already assigned copyright on
> future changes to Guile to the FSF.
>
> New contributors are encouraged to assign copyright to the FSF by
> emailing them one of the forms at
> <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/plain/doc/Copyright/>,
> especially if they intend to contribute significantly going forward.
>
> New contributors may instead choose to not assign copyright to the FSF.
> In that case, copyright on the new code is held by the contributor
> themself or, possibly, by their employer—contributors who choose this
> option are expected to clarify which of these two applies to their
> situation.  A copyright line for the new copyright holder is added to
> files modified in a “legally significant” way³.
>
> Guile remains under the same license, the GNU Lesser General Public
> License, version 3 or any later version; contributions are expected
> under the same terms.
>
> We hope this to be one of the changes that will make it easier to
> contribute to Guile.
>
> Let us know if you have any questions, and enjoy the good hack!
>
> Ludo’ & Andy.
>
> ¹ https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Legally-Significant
> ² https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-June/236182.html
> ³ https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Copyright-Notices



This is very good news!

When I did this copyright assignment for Emacs, I recall
that the procedure was a bit demotivating (the person
was very friendly, but when you live in an isolated area
and don't have a printer and you must print the document
to sign it ...).

Thanks a lot for doing this.

Jean




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
  2022-10-06 20:18 Relaxing the copyright assignment policy Ludovic Courtès
  2022-10-06 20:34 ` Jean Abou Samra
@ 2022-10-06 20:45 ` Thompson, David
  2022-10-07  9:58 ` Maxime Devos
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Thompson, David @ 2022-10-06 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ludovic Courtès; +Cc: guile-devel, Andy Wingo

Hi Ludovic and Andy,

Great news!  Thanks for lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors!

- Dave



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
  2022-10-06 20:34 ` Jean Abou Samra
@ 2022-10-06 20:59   ` Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide @ 2022-10-06 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jean Abou Samra; +Cc: Ludovic Courtès, Andy Wingo, guile-devel

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 908 bytes --]


Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:
> When I did this copyright assignment for Emacs, I recall
> that the procedure was a bit demotivating (the person
> was very friendly, but when you live in an isolated area
> and don't have a printer and you must print the document
> to sign it ...).

It also sounds good to me — though I had the experience that getting the
paperwork done to be allowed to license code written in my free time
under free licenses while employed was much more work than assigning the
copyright for Emacs.

This came up due to copyright assignment, but it was not caused by it.
It was caused by employment laws granting the employer power over the
code that employees write in their free time.

(luckily my employer signed the employer disclaimer of rights)

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 1125 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
  2022-10-06 20:18 Relaxing the copyright assignment policy Ludovic Courtès
  2022-10-06 20:34 ` Jean Abou Samra
  2022-10-06 20:45 ` Thompson, David
@ 2022-10-07  9:58 ` Maxime Devos
  2022-10-07 12:05   ` Ludovic Courtès
  2022-10-08 14:07 ` Jean Abou Samra
  2022-10-29  5:44 ` Ian Kelling
  4 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Maxime Devos @ 2022-10-07  9:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ludovic Courtès, guile-devel; +Cc: Andy Wingo


[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1191 bytes --]



On 06-10-2022 22:18, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello Guilers!
> [...]
> New contributors are encouraged to assign copyright to the FSF by
> emailing them one of the forms at
> <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/plain/doc/Copyright/>,
> especially if they intend to contribute significantly going forward.
> 
> New contributors may instead choose to not assign copyright to the FSF.

What about the following third situation: the contributor doesn't mind 
assigning Guile-related copyright to the FSF, but the assignment process 
can take or is taking a long time or there are some disagreements with 
the assignment contract to resolve (which might not even be possible in 
the end), so

   (1) first the contributor sends the patches without copyright
       assignment
   (2) then they are applied (after review, revisions, etc.)
   (3) once/if the assignment completes, the copyright headers in Guile
       are adjusted appropriately.

-- this avoids the time delay, while at the same time hopefully 
eventually doing the assignment.

Would such a situation be accepted? (It doesn't quite fit the two 
mentioned options.)

Greetings,
Maxime.

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 929 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
  2022-10-07  9:58 ` Maxime Devos
@ 2022-10-07 12:05   ` Ludovic Courtès
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2022-10-07 12:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Maxime Devos; +Cc: guile-devel, Andy Wingo

Hi Maxime,

Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> skribis:

> On 06-10-2022 22:18, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Hello Guilers!
>> [...]
>> New contributors are encouraged to assign copyright to the FSF by
>> emailing them one of the forms at
>> <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/plain/doc/Copyright/>,
>> especially if they intend to contribute significantly going forward.
>> New contributors may instead choose to not assign copyright to the
>> FSF.
>
> What about the following third situation: the contributor doesn't mind
> assigning Guile-related copyright to the FSF, but the assignment
> process can take or is taking a long time or there are some
> disagreements with the assignment contract to resolve (which might not
> even be possible in the end), so
>
>   (1) first the contributor sends the patches without copyright
>       assignment
>   (2) then they are applied (after review, revisions, etc.)
>   (3) once/if the assignment completes, the copyright headers in Guile
>       are adjusted appropriately.
>
> -- this avoids the time delay, while at the same time hopefully
>    eventually doing the assignment.
>
> Would such a situation be accepted? (It doesn't quite fit the two
> mentioned options.)

This is getting complicated.  :-)

A contributor could choose to not assign copyright at first for whatever
reason, and later change their mind and assign copyright for all past
changes.  In that case, all the contributed code would now be
FSF-copyrighted, and we’d remove the corresponding copyright lines.

Obviously we can only do that for *all* past changes and when there’s a
single copyright holder, otherwise it becomes hard to keep track of
things.

I encourage people to choose upfront though to reduce the burden on
committers.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

PS: We can discuss your own situation off-list if you want.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
  2022-10-06 20:18 Relaxing the copyright assignment policy Ludovic Courtès
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2022-10-07  9:58 ` Maxime Devos
@ 2022-10-08 14:07 ` Jean Abou Samra
  2022-10-29  5:44 ` Ian Kelling
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jean Abou Samra @ 2022-10-08 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ludovic Courtès, guile-devel; +Cc: Andy Wingo

FYI, it looks like the file HACKING mentions copyright assignment. You 
probably want to update it.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
  2022-10-06 20:18 Relaxing the copyright assignment policy Ludovic Courtès
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2022-10-08 14:07 ` Jean Abou Samra
@ 2022-10-29  5:44 ` Ian Kelling
  2022-10-29  6:39   ` Ian Kelling
  4 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ian Kelling @ 2022-10-29  5:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ludovic Courtès; +Cc: Andy Wingo, guile-devel


Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> Hello Guilers!
>
> Until now, we required copyright for “legally significant¹”
> contributions to Guile to be assigned to the Free Software Foundation
> (FSF).  This requirement did not exist for code not initially written
> for Guile—e.g., (ice-9 match), sxml-match, etc.  The purported advantage
> of copyright assignment is described at
> <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html>.
>
> Your unreachable-but-nonetheless-friendly co-maintainers, Andy Wingo and
> myself, came to the conclusion that the cost/benefit ratio of mandatory
> copyright assignment is not good for Guile.  Like other projects such as
> GCC², we have decided to relax that policy.
>
> Nothing changes for contributors who have already assigned copyright on
> future changes to Guile to the FSF.
>
> New contributors are encouraged to assign copyright to the FSF by
> emailing them one of the forms at
> <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/plain/doc/Copyright/>,
> especially if they intend to contribute significantly going forward.
>
> New contributors may instead choose to not assign copyright to the FSF.
> In that case, copyright on the new code is held by the contributor
> themself or, possibly, by their employer—contributors who choose this
> option are expected to clarify which of these two applies to their
> situation.  A copyright line for the new copyright holder is added to
> files modified in a “legally significant” way³.
>
> Guile remains under the same license, the GNU Lesser General Public
> License, version 3 or any later version; contributions are expected
> under the same terms.
>
> We hope this to be one of the changes that will make it easier to
> contribute to Guile.
>
> Let us know if you have any questions, and enjoy the good hack!
>
> Ludo’ & Andy.
>
> ¹ https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Legally-Significant
> ² https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-June/236182.html
> ³ https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Copyright-Notices
>
> [[End of PGP Signed Part]]

Hi, I work at FSF as a sysadmin and currently occupy the staff seat on
the board. I just want to add a few points to the conversation.

First, the link you shared, https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
, says that FSF needs assignment or cooperation from all authors to
enforce. As far as I know, since that was written, legal cases have
shown we can enforce the GPL (not as easily) without some cooperation or
full assignment in some jurisdictions for now. I've asked the FSF
licensing team to update it with the right words.

I mostly wanted to share a relevant link,
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/FSF-copyright-handling .  One point
it brings is that employer copyright disclaimers can be done without
assignments. Even if you don't have a policy of requiring employer
copyright disclaimers, I think it makes sense that for any new
contributors who do not assigning copyright, to ask if they have an
employer who owns the copyright. I know that employers in the US get it
automatically in many cases, and they often have employment contracts
that extend into employee's personal time. If it is the case that an
employer owns the copyright, some natural follow questions to the
contributor would be: Since the employer is probably not going to help
enforce the GPL, how about getting them to either assign it to the FSF
or disclaim their ownership so it will be owned by the contributor?  And
if the contributor wants neither of those, I would ask: do you have some
documentation stating that your employer allows you to distribute their
code to GNU under GPLv3+? If, based on the answers, it seems like the
the contributor might not really have the permission to distribute their
contribution under GPLv3+, then it would probably be a good time to
insist on at least an employer copyright disclaimer.

Don't hesitate to ask the FSF any licensing questions via
licensing@fsf.org . FSF has lawyers and licensing experts (more expert
than me) who will answer your questions.

Guile is wonderful language, especially because it is protected by
GPLv3+ and enforced by FSF if the opportunity arises.

Happy hacking!

-- 
Ian Kelling | Senior Systems Administrator, Free Software Foundation
GPG Key: B125 F60B 7B28 7FF6 A2B7  DF8F 170A F0E2 9542 95DF
https://fsf.org | https://gnu.org



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Relaxing the copyright assignment policy
  2022-10-29  5:44 ` Ian Kelling
@ 2022-10-29  6:39   ` Ian Kelling
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ian Kelling @ 2022-10-29  6:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ludovic Courtès; +Cc: Andy Wingo, guile-devel


Ian Kelling <iank@fsf.org> writes:
> it is protected by
> GPLv3+

I should have been more specific and said LGPLv3+ :)




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2022-10-29  6:39 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-10-06 20:18 Relaxing the copyright assignment policy Ludovic Courtès
2022-10-06 20:34 ` Jean Abou Samra
2022-10-06 20:59   ` Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
2022-10-06 20:45 ` Thompson, David
2022-10-07  9:58 ` Maxime Devos
2022-10-07 12:05   ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-10-08 14:07 ` Jean Abou Samra
2022-10-29  5:44 ` Ian Kelling
2022-10-29  6:39   ` Ian Kelling

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).