Re: MaintainerDatabase Copyright
> c) Some people have expressed a concern about having it published in
> a form that legally allows modified copies to be distributed.
No-one on this list has expressed that concern.
Yes, David Welton <firstname.lastname@example.org> said that initially, but after
realising that it can be easily solved with PGP signing, he mailed
to this list saying he would even be happy with GPL.
In another email you write:
> However, this is not the opinion of some other peole who have
> emailed me. I do not want to legally allow any tom, dick, or
> harriette to legally alter my information; and I am not alone. As far
> as I see it now, we have 4 for and 5 against. This is not quite a
Could we have information on who those 5 against are? The 4 in favour
are openly available on the mailinglist. I know only one of those
5 against. I realise that they may not want their name/email to
be revealed on the mailinglist. But if the discussion about this
licence/copyright were to be helt _Before_ changing it as opposed
to after, then at least we could have discussed it with all of
those 5 against.
> Other people have no objection to having it distributed under a
> licence that allows the data to be mutable.
> Firstly, I do not believe the GPL is valid for non-programs.
Dale seems to disagree with you.
> Finally, I have seen nothing that addresses concerns people
> have under point c, apart from opinions that the the people offering
> the opinion did not share the concern. This is not a solution.
Some of the "c" people seem to feel more happy if the database
is PGP signed by the maintainer. If we were to know who those
4 against (we know one: Manoj) people are, we could ask them
how they feel about that.
joost witteveen, email@example.com
#what's this? see http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .