Fedora website, Red Hat, copyright notices and FPCA

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 10:50:52AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Just to cheerfully derail this for a bit - I doubt the usual case is
> that the people checking in the patches are also the ones who created
> them. I know that I more often check in a patch from somewhere else -
> usually upstream - than ones I wrote.
> 
[snip analysis of what the FPCA has in this area]
> 
> So, is the FPCA really giving us much in this context, which may be the
> most common context for patch contributions? Or are we still more or
> less just relying on everyone doing the decent thing?
>
And on the other side of this coin, do we want to force maintainers to hunt
down authors of patches posted on upstream mailing lists and get them to
explicitly license these things so that the maintainers can then add them
to our packages with the explicit license or do we want the FPCA to
establish responsibility for this?

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20110628/60e7b6d8/attachment.bin