Proposals for mono-basic and monodoc

[Justin Conover]

On 11/6/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram at fedoraproject.org> said:
> >> Not all projects have a single entity holding all the copyrights on it.
> >
> > All "official" GNU software is copyright by the FSF.  They could turn
> > around and license future glibc versions under the GPL (or even GPLv3),
> > elimating much of the distribution.
>
> Not all of them.
>
> >
> > Is it worth worrying about _possible_ future license changes?
>
> You trimmed out the rest of what I said which missed the point. If the
> software is under GPL, there is already a patent defense provision in
> it. Context is important.
>
>    It
> > certainly is something to keep in mind, but I don't know that it should
> > be the top thing.
> >
> > This does poibt out a good reason to not assign copyrights to others; I
> > have never done that on my (mostly minor) patches to Open Source
> > software.
>
> Copyright assignment can be very beneficial to a project in many other
> cases.
>
> Rahul
>
> --
> fedora-test-list mailing list
> fedora-test-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe:
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list



Back in the day, mpackage.org was setup, how about pushing all *mono* stuff
to it, and clearing Fedora of any issues that might come up?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20061106/23de3021/attachment.html