On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 03:45:55PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > That won't be comprehensive though, because there are a limited number of > authorized committers who often commit changes contributed by others. Contributors do not necessarily have (c) over the Release Notes, from my understanding, only authors have copyrights and the Release Notes clearly lists who are the main authors. It is my understanding that if any contributor wanted to assert any influence over the license that the Release Notes uses he would first ask to have his name added as an author (and, consequently, a (c) owner of the text).
Just for the same reason we don't ask patch submitters in the BTS to sign a (c) statement for packages we shouldn't be asking contributors sending patches to the BTS (or committing them directly) to do the same for documentation. Considering all contributors equal (regardless of "size"), with all of them being copyright holders for the Release Notes and having veto rights for a license change is insane. Anyway, if a license change was properly announced beforehand contributors that feel that their rights are violated would have ample time to express their concerns. This bug has changed into exactly the same type of discussion that prevents #388141 from being fixed any time soon, even though all the web pages have a footer that says "this text is copyright SPI" and no contributor has ever said that the copyright statement should be ammended to include *him*. Regards Javier
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
