On Mar 30, 2005, at 11:23 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
The question is: is the total of these testcases (from one source)
within that limit ...
[ recalling from memory of past talks with FSF legal ] By submitting
a testcase to the FSF, the author extends rights to the FSF to
republish the testcase,
Daniel Berlin wrote:
I think we should just keep on doing what we do, which is produce small
minimized testcases that are well within the "de minimis" limits for
copyright, or even if they aren't, the tests don't actually do anything
useful from a program perspective.
The number of questionable tes
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 14:52 -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > >IE if we added a very large warning to the submission page that said
> > >"PLEASE NOTE: BY SUBMITTING A TESTCASE, YOU AGREE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT
> > >TO CREATE, USE, AND PUBLISH EITHER YOUR VERBATIM TESTCASE OR A
> > >
Joe Buck wrote:
Daniel Berlin wrote:
IE if we added a very large warning to the submission page that said
"PLEASE NOTE: BY SUBMITTING A TESTCASE, YOU AGREE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT
TO CREATE, USE, AND PUBLISH EITHER YOUR VERBATIM TESTCASE OR A
DERIVATIVE UNDER GCC'S CURRENT LICENSE"
or something of t
Daniel Berlin wrote:
> >IE if we added a very large warning to the submission page that said
> >"PLEASE NOTE: BY SUBMITTING A TESTCASE, YOU AGREE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT
> >TO CREATE, USE, AND PUBLISH EITHER YOUR VERBATIM TESTCASE OR A
> >DERIVATIVE UNDER GCC'S CURRENT LICENSE"
> >or something of t
Robert Dewar wrote:
Daniel Berlin wrote:
IE if we added a very large warning to the submission page that said
"PLEASE NOTE: BY SUBMITTING A TESTCASE, YOU AGREE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT
TO CREATE, USE, AND PUBLISH EITHER YOUR VERBATIM TESTCASE OR A
DERIVATIVE UNDER GCC'S CURRENT LICENSE"
or something
Daniel Berlin wrote:
IE if we added a very large warning to the submission page that said
"PLEASE NOTE: BY SUBMITTING A TESTCASE, YOU AGREE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT
TO CREATE, USE, AND PUBLISH EITHER YOUR VERBATIM TESTCASE OR A
DERIVATIVE UNDER GCC'S CURRENT LICENSE"
or something of the sort, they wo
On Mar 29, 2005, at 7:06 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
They are going to have to show that they had on idea this would
happen, which is
somewhat difficult.
IE if we added a very large warning to the submission page that said
"PLEASE NOTE: BY SUBMITTING A TESTCASE
I suspect we could put a description
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 10:10 -0500, Richard Kenner wrote:
> In reality, a person who submits code knowing it is going to be
> distilled and used in testsuites under our license would probably be
> estopped from claiming it violates their copyright to do so. They are
> going to have
In reality, a person who submits code knowing it is going to be
distilled and used in testsuites under our license would probably be
estopped from claiming it violates their copyright to do so. They are
going to have to show that they had on idea this would happen, which
is som
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 15:50 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Robert Dewar:
>
> > Unfortunately, you can't rely on sane judges, since the plaintiff can
> > always demand a jury trial, and you would be surprised what juries think.
> > Furthermore, deleting the test case makes no sense as a remedy. E
* Robert Dewar:
> Unfortunately, you can't rely on sane judges, since the plaintiff can
> always demand a jury trial, and you would be surprised what juries think.
> Furthermore, deleting the test case makes no sense as a remedy. Either
> there is or there is not a copyright violation. The judge c
Zack Weinberg wrote:
Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The code for these testcases submitted so far are about 12 lines a piece
and have almost nothing which can tell where they came from (Other than
comments in the code).
That's probably fine then. IIRC, previous discussion of this has
g
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 10:04:40AM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > The code for these testcases submitted so far are about 12 lines a piece
> > and have almost nothing which can tell where they came from (Other than
> > comments in the code).
>
> Tha
Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> The code for these testcases submitted so far are about 12 lines a piece
> and have almost nothing which can tell where they came from (Other than
> comments in the code).
That's probably fine then. IIRC, previous discussion of this has
generally come
On Monday, March 28, 2005, at 12:56 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
> >How do we deal with this, copyright-wise ? Do we have to take special
> >care when deriving test-cases from them ?
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 09:28:43AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> The canonical method I use is to delete all aspects of t
>
> On Monday, March 28, 2005, at 12:56 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
> > How do we deal with this, copyright-wise ? Do we have to take special
> > care when deriving test-cases from them ?
>
> The canonical method I use is to delete all aspects of the program that
> don't influence the bug, comments
On Monday, March 28, 2005, at 12:56 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
How do we deal with this, copyright-wise ? Do we have to take special
care when deriving test-cases from them ?
The canonical method I use is to delete all aspects of the program that
don't influence the bug, comments, unused/unneeded fu
L.S.,
An ex-J3 member has started to apply his bag of test programs on
gfortran - this could result in potentially hundreds of bug reports in
Bugzilla with attached test-code.
How do we deal with this, copyright-wise ? Do we have to take special
care when deriving test-cases from them ?
Thank
19 matches
Mail list logo
