license [was Re: Doubts and Ideas]
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: license [was Re: Doubts and Ideas]
- From: Josip Rodin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 01:01:48 +0200
- Message-id: <20070601230148.GA10866@keid.carnet.hr>
- In-reply-to: <20070531012344.GH7113@archimedes.ucr.edu>
- References: <4659F628.email@example.com> <20070530140825.GB13409@keid.carnet.hr> <20070530155125.GA1031@javifsp.no-ip.org> <20070530163849.GA14362@keid.carnet.hr> <20070531012344.GH7113@archimedes.ucr.edu>
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 06:23:44PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> In any event, to resolve this issue completely
While we're at it. Since we obviously have time-related issues with the
complete solution :) can someone suggest an alternate phrasing for /license
that would not be false? How do we reference webwml committers as a group
without the reference being legally invalid?
Maybe we could replace the /license page with a script which would pull out
the usernames of all the committers for a given source file (via cvs log or
so) and print out the real names (via db.d.o, extra variables, etc) together
with years of changes. That would have two essential problems: a) revision
1.1 for some files isn't necessarily the original (some were imported), and
b) not all revisions necessarily constituted a copyrightable change.
Hence, I don't know if it would be worth it for the sake of copyright.
It might still be worth it for the sake of simply giving credit.
2. That which causes joy or happiness.