From: Patrice N. <mai...@pa...> - 2004-04-13 08:14:24
|
Hi, I have been thinking a bit about how the license issue should be handled. Specifically I thought about who actually owns BKM. I have come up with the following proposal. This is basically a brain storming, and not a formal proposal yet. :-) 1. The contributor of the code/icon/whatever owns the copyright 2. Contributors are tracked with the CVS module. The person who commits the contribution into CVS is the owner of it. This remains so even after the contributor has left the project. 3. In order to change the license of BKM, every contributor needs to approve. To ask for approval, the SourceForge capabilities are used (i.e. use...@us...). If the contributor does not give any feedback within 60 days, his/her permission is implicitly granted. 4. The project admins will ensure that this guidelines are given to a contributor and that he/her agrees to this conditions. Only after this is done, will the user be added to the projects developers. 5. This guidelines apply to the whole bkm projects at Sourceforge. This includes at the moment pyBKM and vbBKM. Please give me comments about this proposal. I'm very willing to change it according to your feedback. And I'm not sure if this would be too complicated. But I think it gives us a pretty good balance between control and ensuring that BKM stays free. 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) |