Re: [Bkm-devel] License issues

[Patrice N. <mai...@pa...>]

Daniel Remenak <rem...@ya...> writes:

> Many GPL projects become very quagmirish after a bunch of people have committed
> changes.  I think it's usually smoothest to have copyright assignment to a
> maintainer; this is the way BZFlag does it, everything that's committed is
> automatically copyright Tim Riker.  I would not be opposed to assigning my
> copyrights on modifications to BKM to you.  This would allow us to relicense if
> necessary, which could be necessary in situations other than proprietary
> code...e.g. if the GPL is found unreasonable in court, or if we decide that an
> LGPL would suit it better.  
> All this is of course your choice; many projects do operate with distributed
> copyright, it just makes it much less flexible.  Some projects want that
> inflexibility; gaim for instance did it specifically so that it could never be
> licensed under anything but the GPL.  This also removes the responsibility from
> the maintainer; e.g. if Tim Riker was to suddenly die, BZFlag would be in quite
> a mess if his will didn't say anything about the copyrights.

I will be thinking about it. Both models have their advantage.

Regards,
Patrice

-- 
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes
to the Father except through me."               (The Bible, John 14:6)