future Squeak release licensing (was "2007-01-17 SqF board notes")

Craig Latta craig at netjam.org
Thu Jan 25 23:33:02 UTC 2007

Hi Stef--

> Will we accept code in 3.10 by people that did not sign the MIT
> agreement? I hope not.

     This is currently left to Ralph's discretion, subject to the
approval of the board. I personally favor allowing only contributions
from those who have signed the agreement; I assume the release process
will make that easy in the near future.

> How can the release team access this information? Do we have a list
> available?

     As I mentioned in the agenda for the 2007-02-07 meeting, I will
make the first report on contributor response to the agreement
(including a list of positive responders). Between now and then, I plan
to get that information from Viewpoints.

> How a squeaker can sign such an agreement if he was not originally
> contacted?

     I assume the release team will make the agreement available to
anyone who wants it, then people can sign and return it.

> A suggestion for Viewpoints: I would be nice to be able to have
> scanned copies of the licenses somewhere on the foundation server too.

     That's unlikely, because the signed agreements include
contributors' physical mailing addresses and signatures. We could black
those out, but then I don't see much difference between those scans and
a simple list of names.

     thanks again,


Craig Latta

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list