Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

[squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

9 messages Options

Igor Stasenko

[squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

A small changeset which adds a license info for each method.
http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6993
Works in same way as user initials.

I think it can be useful for future relicensing efforts.
With this simple patch, we will be able to easily find out, what
methods need attention.

We can put strict limitation, that in squeak release, from now on,
only methods with stamp:
<initials> <license> <date> <time>

accepted.
And only if <license> field is ==== 'MIT'.

:)

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Tapple Gao

Re: [squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 06:40:48AM +0200, Igor Stasenko wrote:

> A small changeset which adds a license info for each method.
> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6993
> Works in same way as user initials.
>
> I think it can be useful for future relicensing efforts.
> With this simple patch, we will be able to easily find out, what
> methods need attention.
>
> We can put strict limitation, that in squeak release, from now on,
> only methods with stamp:
> <initials> <license> <date> <time>
>
> accepted.
> And only if <license> field is ==== 'MIT'.

I think that's a great idea. I should bring this to the
attention of the board. Currently, the board has issued a
no-contributions-allowed policy until we can ensure that all
further contributions are clearly licensed, and stop muddying
the license issue even further. I think this is a perfect
answer.

--
Matthew Fulmer -- http://mtfulmer.wordpress.com/

Tapple Gao

Re: [squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 09:53:45PM -0700, Matthew Fulmer wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 06:40:48AM +0200, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> > A small changeset which adds a license info for each method.
> > http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6993
> > Works in same way as user initials.
> >
> > I think it can be useful for future relicensing efforts.
> > With this simple patch, we will be able to easily find out, what
> > methods need attention.
> >
> > We can put strict limitation, that in squeak release, from now on,
> > only methods with stamp:
> > <initials> <license> <date> <time>
> >
> > accepted.
> > And only if <license> field is ==== 'MIT'.
>
> I think that's a great idea. I should bring this to the
> attention of the board. Currently, the board has issued a
> no-contributions-allowed policy until we can ensure that all
> further contributions are clearly licensed, and stop muddying
> the license issue even further. I think this is a perfect
> answer.

oh wait. You are part of the board. problem solved. :P

--
Matthew Fulmer -- http://mtfulmer.wordpress.com/

Tapple Gao

Re: [squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

In reply to this post by Tapple Gao

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 09:53:45PM -0700, Matthew Fulmer wrote:
> Currently, the board has issued a no-contributions-allowed
> policy until we can ensure that all further contributions are
> clearly licensed, and stop muddying the license issue even
> further.

I'm very sorry. This is not the case. Please disregard that I
said this. I was mistaken

--
Matthew Fulmer -- http://mtfulmer.wordpress.com/

cedreek

Re: [squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

Forgive my ignorance, but in this case, each time you submit a method,
you inherit previous licence or you can change it to the one you like?
I think this is not obvious except of course if the method doesn't
exist.

Also, maybe this is another post but I find we should have a better
initial management in relation to real user profile (then in relation
to nice squeakpeople pages). Personally, I haven't submitted lot of
code, but I use 'cb' and later I saw somewhere (I don't remember
where) that somebody used it already ! I really think we need a clear
and precise user/contributor/developper registration mechanism (that
could have been a nice GSoC too ;) ).
What do you think ?

Cheers,

Cédrick

Giovanni Corriga

Re: [squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

In reply to this post by Tapple Gao

Matthew Fulmer ha scritto:

> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 06:40:48AM +0200, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>> A small changeset which adds a license info for each method.
>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6993
>> Works in same way as user initials.
>>
>> I think it can be useful for future relicensing efforts.
>> With this simple patch, we will be able to easily find out, what
>> methods need attention.
>>
>> We can put strict limitation, that in squeak release, from now on,
>> only methods with stamp:
>> <initials> <license> <date> <time>
>>
>> accepted.
>> And only if <license> field is ==== 'MIT'.
>
> I think that's a great idea. I should bring this to the
> attention of the board. Currently, the board has issued a
> no-contributions-allowed policy until we can ensure that all
> further contributions are clearly licensed, and stop muddying
> the license issue even further. I think this is a perfect
> answer.
>

Wouldn't it be better to place this information at the package level?

Giovanni

Igor Stasenko

Re: [squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

On 25/03/2008, Giovanni Corriga <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Matthew Fulmer ha scritto:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 06:40:48AM +0200, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> >> A small changeset which adds a license info for each method.
> >> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6993
> >> Works in same way as user initials.
> >>
> >> I think it can be useful for future relicensing efforts.
> >> With this simple patch, we will be able to easily find out, what
> >> methods need attention.
> >>
> >> We can put strict limitation, that in squeak release, from now on,
> >> only methods with stamp:
> >> <initials> <license> <date> <time>
> >>
> >> accepted.
> >> And only if <license> field is ==== 'MIT'.
> >
> > I think that's a great idea. I should bring this to the
> > attention of the board. Currently, the board has issued a
> > no-contributions-allowed policy until we can ensure that all
> > further contributions are clearly licensed, and stop muddying
> > the license issue even further. I think this is a perfect
> > answer.
> >
>
>
> Wouldn't it be better to place this information at the package level?
>

This change is mainly concerning changesets , when people submitting
fixes/extensions of separate methods in different packages.

>
> Giovanni
>
>

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Stephen Pair

Re: [squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

I think this is too weak (i.e. trivially altered and hence wouldn't stand up very well as proof of license terms)...it might be a convenient point of reference, but I'd also like to see packages, or change sets, or arbitrary collections of objects to be able to be digitally signed by an author with their license terms (and the signature ability alone is probably not sufficient...you also need some technology (ie. trust network) to manage the authenticity of the signing keys). Then, all of it needs to be organized and archived somewhere.

On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 25/03/2008, Giovanni Corriga <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Matthew Fulmer ha scritto:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 06:40:48AM +0200, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> >> A small changeset which adds a license info for each method.
> >> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6993
> >> Works in same way as user initials.
> >>
> >> I think it can be useful for future relicensing efforts.
> >> With this simple patch, we will be able to easily find out, what
> >> methods need attention.
> >>
> >> We can put strict limitation, that in squeak release, from now on,
> >> only methods with stamp:
> >> <initials> <license> <date> <time>
> >>
> >> accepted.
> >> And only if <license> field is ==== 'MIT'.
> >
> > I think that's a great idea. I should bring this to the
> > attention of the board. Currently, the board has issued a
> > no-contributions-allowed policy until we can ensure that all
> > further contributions are clearly licensed, and stop muddying
> > the license issue even further. I think this is a perfect
> > answer.
> >
>
>
> Wouldn't it be better to place this information at the package level?
>

This change is mainly concerning changesets , when people submitting
fixes/extensions of separate methods in different packages.

>
> Giovanni

>
>

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Giovanni Corriga

Re: [squeak-dev] License info in methods stamp

In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko

--- "Igor Stasenko" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 25/03/2008, Giovanni Corriga <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Matthew Fulmer ha scritto:
> >
> > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 06:40:48AM +0200, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> > >> A small changeset which adds a license info for each method.
> > >> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6993
> > >> Works in same way as user initials.
> > >>
> > >> I think it can be useful for future relicensing efforts.
> > >> With this simple patch, we will be able to easily find out, what
> > >> methods need attention.
> > >>
> > >> We can put strict limitation, that in squeak release, from now on,
> > >> only methods with stamp:
> > >> <initials> <license> <date> <time>
> > >>
> > >> accepted.
> > >> And only if <license> field is ==== 'MIT'.
> > >
> > > I think that's a great idea. I should bring this to the
> > > attention of the board. Currently, the board has issued a
> > > no-contributions-allowed policy until we can ensure that all
> > > further contributions are clearly licensed, and stop muddying
> > > the license issue even further. I think this is a perfect
> > > answer.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Wouldn't it be better to place this information at the package level?
> >
>
> This change is mainly concerning changesets , when people submitting
> fixes/extensions of separate methods in different packages.
>

The it should be the changeset, shouldn't it?

Giovanni