Re: [Jython-dev] Maintaining the Definitive Guide to Jython

[Jim B. <jim...@py...>]

Jeff,

Thanks for bringing this up! It would be great for this book to be updated
with PRs, which is why we licensed it under CC-SA, wrote it using a source
text approach, and placed it under repo management.

We also currently have assent support for any PRs per GitHub terms of
service:
https://help.github.com/en/articles/github-terms-of-service#6-contributions-under-repository-license

(See more here:
https://ben.balter.com/2018/01/02/why-you-probably-shouldnt-add-a-cla-to-your-open-source-project/
)

So really there's nothing more to be done on the admin side, as I see it.

- Jim

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 9:14 AM Jeff Allen <ja...@fa...> wrote:

> We have a few pull requests against the Jython book in GitHub, and some
> interest in seeing it updated. The authors hold a copyright, but released
> it under a Creative Commons 3.0 CC-BY-SA Licence. It publishes
> automatically via ReadTheDocs. https://jython.readthedocs.io
>
> One clear thing is that a modified version must also be released under the
> same license. Contributors have to assent to that somehow, and this has
> nothing to do with the license under which the Jython code base is
> released, or the PSF contributor form. I'm wondering what that assent
> consists of, and how we keep a record.
>
> I found this helpful:
> https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Best_practices_for_attribution in
> forming an idea of what the intention is.
>
> The stuff about re-use and derivative works does not perfectly fit the
> case of publication from a repository, but I think closely enough if one
> regards the state handed down as an "original" and any current state as
> either "modified slightly" (after a simple bug-fix) or a "derivative"
> (after adding a new chapter). The record of change in the repository will
> do, I think, as a description of who authored what change. Almost
> everything asked for by CC as attribution is supplied by the context, given
> the change is *in* the repository.
>
> I've seen it suggested each commit/patch should contain a label signifying
> assent. Elsewhere I've seen a requirement to add oneself to a contributors
> file, in which could assert the license at the top. It's hardly
> unforgeable, but evidence of a sort if need be, which it probably never
> will. Does either of these seem reasonable to us to ask people? Thoughts?
>
> Jeff
>
> --
> Jeff Allen
>
>