[Python-Dev] Backported faster RLock to Python 2.6.

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Thu Jan 7 13:23:11 CET 2010

Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:46, Johan Gill <johan.gill at agama.tv> wrote:
>> Hi devs,
>> the company where I work has done some work on Python, and the question is
>> how this work, owned by the company, can be contributed to the community
>> properly. Are there any license issues or other pitfalls we need to think
>> about? I imagine that other companies have contributed before, so this is
>> probably an already solved problem.
> I'm not a license lawyer, but typically your company needs to give the
> code to the community. Yes, it means it stops owning it.

As Simon pointed out, while some organisations do work that way, the PSF
isn't one of them.

The PSF only requires that the code be contributed under a license that
then allows us to turn around and redistribute it under a different open
source license without requesting additional permission from the
copyright holder. For corporate contributions, I believe the contributor
agreement needs to be signed by an authorised agent of the company - the
place to check that would probably be psf at python.org (that's the email
address for the PSF board).

Assuming the subject line relates to the code that you would like to
contribute though, that particular change is unlikely to happen - 2.6 is
in maintenance mode and changing RLock from a Python implementation to
the faster C one is solidly in new feature territory. Although a
backport of the 3.2 C RLock implementation to 2.7 could be useful, I
doubt that backporting code provided by an existing committer would be
the subject of this query :)


Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list