Am 27.02.2014 22:40, schrieb anatoly techtonik:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> wrote:
On 28 February 2014 07:32, anatoly techtonik <techtonik@gmail.com> wrote:
https://bitbucket.org/techtonik/python-stdlib
This needs to be extended and integrated into stdlib development process.
Wow Anatoly. Are you finally going to sign the PSF Contributor Agreement?
This idea is for GSoC students. python-stdlib is free from the license burden with UNLICENSE, so you better ask PSF why they don't accept it.
Offtopic, but since it is about GSoC, and there are people studying copyright and open source, I'll explain my position just in case somebody will be able to help with that in the future.
I don't sign CLA, because:
1. I don't want to release my code under restrictive PSF license https://tldrlegal.com/license/python-license-2.0
You don't, the PSF does.
2. PSF doesn't comply with terms of Apache 2.0 license (include license) which is probably chosen by at least one contributor for CLA https://tldrlegal.com/license/apache-license-2.0-(apache-2.0)
This is not true.
3. I don't want to give PSF exclusive rights for all code and documentation to be released under any other "open source" license. PSF may be bought by some corporation and they will have the right to impose their own "open source license text" on it. (yes, I don't trust people at all).
This is a valid concern, however for code with your "UNLICENSE" any corporation can do anything with it right now anyway.
4. If I sign, I will be less motivated to open the Python docs under CC-BY license with examples that can be copy-pasted without requiring PSF license in your project. Right now using logging examples without it is illegal.
This *might* be a valid concern (IANAL), but it's one I've never heard from you so far. Why don't you start discussing this one explicitly?
5. Everything is owned by PSF is wrong.
Well, the PSF owns a lot of money, and I don't think money is wrong. Jokes aside, the PSF explicitly *doesn't* own your copyright due to the CLA.
Python is a community project, and core code should be shared as open as possible (with credits where due). Public domain with optional crediting and patent grant is ideal. Trademarks are not affected. Nobody is forced and can do what they want. And current licensing uncertainty no good for collaboration. 6. I want people to have free entry for participating in open source projects, meaning that the patent grant and agreement to release their contribution under the open source license that project uses, should work by default without any CLAs.
These are again valid concerns from your side, but you will have to understand that the PSF does not have the freedom to abolish the CLA. Georg