[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:00:49 +0100
From: u-uy74@...ey.se
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: musl licensing
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 06:41:26PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> However I do think it may be controversial to start claiming copyright
> on utterly trivial source files that could have been mechanically
> generated and that could not possibly be written in any way other than
> how they're currently written without adding gratuitous stuff.
+1
It's where the copyright laws are (especially) inadequate for software.
> I don't think anything CLA-like is acceptable to our community. All
> the evidence points to it being a huge barrier to entry for new
> contributors.
+1
Btw which countries' laws were the obstacles for Google to use musl?
I _guess_ USA but that was never stated. Google has business all over
the world and might care of any place and use case. Does musl care
about the same thing (besides the wish of a potential user and a potential
contributor)? I can't tell.
Rune
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
