[pydotorg-www] PSF Contributor form

[Aahz]

On Sun, Apr 22, 2012, Mats Wichmann wrote:
>
> I guess I have to feel free to disagree.   For my case, my big company
> has been involved in open source for a long time, we have a clear well
> documented process for contributions to projects, and though that
> process has gotten more complicated over the years since I did it, I
> have gone through it for Python, following all the necessary steps, and
> it's all approved: the people who need to know, do know, the bases are
> all covered, with a clear understanding that the contributions are all
> that, no ownership interest would be retained by us.  If there's a new
> "contributor agreement", it does mean a lawyer has to look at it in
> excruciating detail. And as a deal unique to PSF, that means the chance
> of issues. This question is not supposed to be be about me, as noted, so
> maybe the impression I have of "if used to work, now it's going to get
> more complicated" looms bigger.  But I do know we've had problems with
> both the Ubuntu contributor agreement, and the Fedora one, to name two
> that actually affected me.  There are projects that get by without "you
> must sign this assignment of rights" type contributor agreements, not
> sure why Python can't be one of them.

Maybe because they don't have Python's history of problems with
licensing.  IIRC, you were around for the Python 1.6/2.0 mess that
precipitated the creation of the PSF.

For anyone who doesn't remember, the following will give some flavor:
http://www.python.org/download/releases/1.6/license_faq/
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

import antigravity