[Python-Dev] Re: Re: license issues with profiler.py and md5.h/md5c.c

[Terry Reedy]

"Aahz" <aahz at pythoncraft.com> wrote in message 
news:20050212145326.GA7836 at panix.com...
On Sat, Feb 12, 2005, Terry Reedy wrote:
>>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib.html

>> After reading this page and pages linked thereto, I get the impression 
>> that
>> you are only asking for contributor forms from contributors of original
>> material (such as module or manual section) and not from submitters of
>> suggestions (via news,mail) or patches (via sourceforge).  Correct?

> Half-correct: patches constitute "work" and should also require a
> contrib agreement.

As I remember, my impression was based on the suggested procedure of first 
copywrite one's work and then license it under one of two acceptible 
"original licenses".  This makes sense for a whole module, but hardly for 
most patches, to the point of being nonsense for a patch of one word, as 
some of mine have been (in text form, with the actual diff being prepared 
by the committer).  This is not to deny that editing -- finding the exact 
place to insert or change a word is "work" -- but to say that it is work of 
a different sort from original authorship.

So, if the lawyer thinks patches should also have a contrib agreement, then 
I strongly recommend a separate blanket agreement that covers all patches 
one ever contributes as one ongoing work.

>  But we're probably not going to press the point
> until we get contrib agreements from all CVS committers.

Even though I am not such, I would happily fill and fax a blanket patch 
agreement were that deemed to be helpful.

Terry J. Reedy