Re: Q to the candidates: GPLv2 system library exception
Mehdi Dogguy writes ("Re: Q to the candidates: GPLv2 system library exception"):
> On 29/03/2017 20:38, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Do you think this situation needs addressing? What do you propose do
> > about it? Do you think the way the ZFS situation was resolved could
> > be an example?
>
> I am not an expert in licensing issues but it is quite easy to ask advice
> >from specialists on this matter and I'd approve spending necessary funds
> to get qualified advice, of course. We already have an agreement with
> Conservancy which allows us to ask them to work some limited amount of
> time on a specific subject each month. We can start by doing that to
> evaluate the complexity of the subject and discuss with them how we can
> analyze this issue.
>
> (I'll contact you off-list to initiate that and see how we can work on
> this subject)
This seems like an excellent example of a thing that could usefully be
delegated.
Why not delegate someone who is interested, give them a budget cap,
and ask them to:
- consult within the project on the wording of the question to
be asked
- consult with SFLC, as authorised delegate of the DPL, to put
and clarify the question and get the answer
- report back to the project as a whole
I did roughly this for the PHP licence problem, without a DPL
delegation, but simply with an explicit approval by the DPL for the
laywers to talk to me. This process worked well until the report
stage, where I felt I didn't have the authority to unilaterally
publish the advice we had received and as a result it got sat on for a
long time. A formal delegation with clear terms of reference would
have solved this.
Ian.
Reply to: