[python-ldap] github etc.

[Florian Friesdorf]

On Sat, 23 Apr 2011 01:23:00 +0200, Michael Ströder <michael at stroeder.com> wrote:
> Russell Jackson wrote:
> > On 04/22/2011 07:54 AM, Michael Ströder wrote:
> >> Florian Friesdorf wrote:
> >>> I imported python-ldap to github [2] because I prefer it and intend to
> >>> work (maybe with Vitaliy?) on patches.
> >>
> >> I strongly dislike having python-ldap code on public services like github also
> >> for legal reasons.
> > 
> > Curious. What is the reason for this concern?
> > 
> > Using github makes it easy to share changes without email diff chaos. Is
> > it because of github's business model? If so, would gitorious.org be
> > acceptable?
> 
> I understand quite well why one wants to use git. But I'm very cautious not to
> run into suspectible terms of use by any such public services. I'm not a
> lawyer and I won't pay lawyers to check the terms of use jungle of such a
> service. So please do yourself a favour and use the existing infrastructure.

I removed python-ldap from my github account for now. But, I do not
understand why it is a problem, if I put its code there.

Is it python-ldap's license that does not permit it?

Shall I put it there under a different name?

github explicitly states "We claim no intellectual property rights over
the material you provide to the Service. Your profile and materials
uploaded remain yours." [1]

> Up to now I was able to handle the small amount of patches submitted without
> problem. The only patch I requested the submitter to renew was against 2.3.13
> for Python 3.x support while CVS HEAD already contained larger changes for
> upcoming python-ldap 2.4.
>
> Also please understand that if you plan larger changes discuss them on the
> mailing list first. I will give an indication whether I see a possibility to
> incorporate changes into python-ldap or not.

My intention is not that you need to use github, but that I can use it
with my colleges to cooperatively work on patches before submitting them
to you for inclusion.

Of course, I will discuss changes on the mailing list.

You have your workflow for discussion and inclusion of patches, which I
fully respect and will stick to. I would highly appreciate an
explanation, why I shall not stick to my workflow for creation of
patches.

[1] http://help.github.com/terms/
-- 
Florian Friesdorf <flo at chaoflow.net>
  GPG FPR: 7A13 5EEE 1421 9FC2 108D  BAAF 38F8 99A3 0C45 F083
Jabber/XMPP: flo at chaoflow.net
IRC: chaoflow on freenode,ircnet,blafasel,OFTC
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ldap/attachments/20110427/2b4da017/attachment.pgp>