Re: [Notion-devel] the agenda

[Juri H. <ju...@fa...>]

On 09/04/10 15:46, kevin granade wrote:
> Greetings all,
>
> The way forward I see for license compliance is this:
> 1. We import the existing code into the repository.  (at this point we
> are compliant as we are distributing the code "as-is")
> 2a. We go on a renaming spree, the extent of which is up to debate.
> (compliant as we still haven't violated any of the "special clauses")
> 2b. (possibly in parallel with 2a) General inoffensive cleanup, "make
> it build" (still compliant with "special clauses")
> 3. Once we have done all necessary renaming, etc... we can proceed
> with a clean conscience to making changes that Tuomo would object to,
> since we have met the alternative option in the "special clauses".
>
> Are there any holes in my reasoning?  This scenario lets us import the
> code immediately and get on with it, and still allows some breathing
> room during "phase 2" to come to consensus about just how much changes
> need to be made to the code in order to say that we are clear of the
> special requirements.
>
> This scenario is important to me, as 2b is actually my priority.  I
> don't feel the lack of features that Tuomo didn't add, but I DO want
> to ensure the stability and availability of this WM in the future.
>
> Thanks for moving forward on this, I just want my favorite WM to
> remain available,
> Kevin Granade
>    
Do we violate any terms by renaming the project while still having "ion" 
executables? If not, then seems that your scenario fits well.

Juri Hamburg