From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Lemmer Webber Subject: Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines? Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:48:19 -0400 Message-ID: <87d0rseja4.fsf@dustycloud.org> References: <87k1m852yc.fsf@gnu.org> <20181024010640.GA14776@antares.lan> <87y3an8xxe.fsf@gnu.org> <20181024142115.GA2088@antares.lan> <20181026233648.0fd1ea35@merlin.browniehive.net> <1540593452.395052.1556179352.51508E84@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20181028194258.773fa475@merlin.browniehive.net> <20181028195054.GA10708@antares.lan> <20181029095913.25aa3829@alma-ubu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37395) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBeP-0002Lo-8f for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:48:29 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBeM-00088j-0l for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:48:29 -0400 Received: from dustycloud.org ([50.116.34.160]:50362) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBeI-00085J-9z for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:48:23 -0400 In-reply-to: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: t_w_@freenet.de Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Thorsten Wilms writes: > On 29/10/2018 09.59, Bj=C3=B6rn H=C3=B6fling wrote: >> In law, there is the term of "conduct implying an intent". So even not >> signing anything you could argue that by sending a bug or a patch you >> silently agree with the community guidelines, CoC, etc. You enter the >> community be interacting the first time. And will be judged by their >> guidelines. > > It used to be that you could pick a Free Software project and send a patc= h. > > Now sending a patch is supposed to imply agreeing to the equivalent of > an EULA? Everyone is expected to welcome that as progress? Submitting code to a project under a copyleft license is also agreeing to policy.