[Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL defense issues

Luis R. Rodriguez mcgrof at kernel.org
Tue Aug 30 17:20:33 UTC 2016


On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 06:45:40PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 06:15:57PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 08:55:42AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 09:24:54PM -0700, Jeremy Allison via Ksummit-discuss wrote:
> > > > Your opinion on that is clear and I understand why you hold it.
> > > > There are many other developers who hold the same opinion, but
> > > > lots of them work on FreeBSD not Linux.
> > > > 
> > > > Respectfully, I don't agree with you. Greg and Ted seem to agree
> > > > with you, Linus (like me) seems to imagine there can be a case for
> > > > that shiny red button.
> > > 
> > > For the record, I believe there can be a case for the shiny red
> > > button.  I just want Linus, and not the SFC (or some --- as admitted
> > > by the SFC --- minority set of developers), to be the one who decides
> > > when it's appropriate to push it.
> > > 
> > > I've said it before, and I've said it again.  For me, this is much
> > > more about a project governance issue.  We don't let random pissed off
> > > army officers decide when to start World War III. 
> > 
> > If you are trying to equate "random pissed off officers" with those kernel
> > developers part of the SFC alliance, then I have to say that is perhaps one of
> > the most stupid misrepresentations of members of SFC that I have heard so far.
> > Unless of course your statement is educated, you know all members part of SFC
> > and have asked each one why they joined.
> 
> That brings up a question, who exactly is the SFC representing here?

I've come out:

http://www.do-not-panic.com/2016/02/im-part-of-conservancys-gpl-compliance.html

Others have as well. We don't force people to come out though obviously, so its
optional. Some folks would prefer their association to remain private. That's
a right they should have.

What do you think? Did it ever cross your mind to consider joining ?

> What developers have signed over copyrights to the SFC?  Was this done
> in a "permanent" way?  "revoking" copyright assignment isn't exactly a
> simple thing to do, last I checked, so is this really true?

If this is a concern, perhaps its something SFC can address. Also, would
you like a way to participate without signing off copyrights to SFC ? If so
that sounds like a type of discussion we could start.

> > If you don't know then please educate yourself on this as reading this type of
> > incoherent nonsense being spouted out is just offending and does nothing to help.
> 
> Without knowing the above, it's hard to know what is, or is not, a
> stupid misrepresentation :)

But the analogy was made so it was rather stupid and simply not contributing
anything. What you describe however, sounds like useful feedback.

  Luis


More information about the Ksummit-discuss mailing list