This is the mail archive of the ecos-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: atHTTPD new patch


On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 07:19:18AM -0800, Anthony Tonizzo wrote:
> Andrew:
> 
> Me moved the development to ecosforge because it would
> be much simpler to test new code as it is developed by different
> parties. Currently only Oyvind and myself can check new code
> in, but you will still receive new patches for the eCos tree from
> me.
> 
> Just to clarify the issue of copyright assignments. Is there
> any lithmus test to determine which contributions need an
> assignment and which do not?

I don't think there is a simple lithmus test. I look and see how
obvious the change is. A One line change don't need an assignment. A
one line changes repeated 10 times in a file does not need an an
assignment. 10 new lines which implement an algorithm does need an
assignment. 

It can worse for you if you submit one patch containing lots of
changes to the same place. It becomes unclear if its 10 individual one
lines all next to each other, or it is one 10 line change. The first
does not necessarily need an assignment, but the second does. However
how are we to know? So we will take the safe option and ask for an
assignment.
 
> Somewhere I read something like "10 original lines of code"
> make up the breakwater. Is this the accepted standard or do
> you reserve the right to change this on a per-case basis?

Jifl?
 
> Sorry if I sound like a sticlker for details, but I want to make sure
> that even after moving the development to ecosforge, there will be
> no problems in the future to submit patches to eCos.

Me too, which is why i made this warning. Also, this is why when you
announced ecosforge there was a statement from the maintainers which
talked about the assignment process and the quality process still
needing to be fulfilled when you submit a contribution.

> > Secondly, please keep tight control and records for everything you add
> > to your ecosforge tree. When you want to contribute a patch we have
> > the same copyright issues.
> > You need to be able to convince the eCos
> > maintainers that all the patch is covered by appropriate copyright
> > assignments. The more open and visible your process is the easier you
> > will find it to convince us.
 
> The only way to record what is added is through the changelog. And
> because we (as opposed to the eCos maintainers) modify the changelog,
> it means that it still boils down to a matter fo trusting the contributors to
> eCos, right? Or are you suggesting that we save all e-mail and individual
> patches that were received from all contributors?

It is not only the ChangeLog. There is the subversion
logs/history. This allows the eCos maintainers, or anybody else, to
look at the individual patches you commit to your tree. I've not tried
it, but i guess i have read only access to all this information. I
would also suggest you keep your individual patches from all
contributors, preferably in a publicly accessible mailing list. All
patches to eCos go into ecos-patch, even if they come from an
maintainer. It leaves a public record, so that if there ever is any
questions about copyright, it is all clear and out in the open, making
it easy for us to defend ourselves.

IANAL, but i don't think it is just trust. You have an assignment. If
you contribute to eCos something which you are not allowed to
contribute, you are probably violating your assignment. That could get
you into legal copyright trouble.
 
> If we need to ask for a copyright assignment, do we ask the submitter
> to send it to eCosCentric?

Just follow the usual copyright assignment process:

http://ecos.sourceware.org/assign.html

        Andrew


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]