Re: Q to the candidates: GPLv2 system library exception
On 30/03/2017 16:14, Ian Jackson wrote:
> 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
I'd not necessarily bind it with SFLC though.
> - 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.
>
You are raising an excellent point. I think this is a great idea if
we have someone motivated to do this work. So far, we did not have
(m)?any requests for legal advices. Last one we have had was the one
for ZFS on Linux, which was in 2015. I have invited FTP team at the
beginning of my term to not hesitate to ask for legal advices when
questions arise. The process is actually quite simple: Last july, I
have asked DSA to create a private RT queue for such matters. We only
have to write down our request and have the DPL send a signed mail to
the queue. Then, Conservancy will receive a notification and can start
discussing with us the specific terms for the subject. Finally, if the
advice can be made public, it is obviously something we will share with
the community.
So, to get back to your initial questions:
- Yes, it is an excellent idea
- I did not push for this idea because of the low number of requests for
this type of "expense". So making up a budget (or a max sum) for this
activity can be done but it is not necessary right now.
- I'd very much encourage such initiatives if there are people motivated
to do the work
- To me, working on the fund-raising part and delegating the part that
takes care of approving budgets for sprints looks more useful (to me)
in the short term.
Regards,
--
Mehdi
Reply to: