<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Martin Kuball wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid200510151247.09580.martinkuball@web.de" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Am Friday, 14. October 2005 22:57 schrieb Samir Saidani:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Chris Muller <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:chris@funkyobjects.org"><chris@funkyobjects.org></a> writes:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">One more point is I don't believe code "ownership" will
ultimately satisfy because it requires unreasonable expectations
from someone (the owner) and creates a bottleneck. How can you
rely on that?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Putting our code in the public domain. Code ownership implies
complexity. Personally I consider I'm writing code anonymously,
even if the name is here for practical purpose. This code has no
licence, and no owner. A not licenced code does not mean that you
cannot licenced this code, it would be a contradiction. Take it and
put whatever licences you want. The fact is that the code has no
owner, and the illusion is that you think that you are the owner.
Samir
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Oh come on now, you don't think code ownership is about legal issues
here. If some code is actively maintained by a person or a group and
other people keep changing that code in ways the maintainer(s) do not
like, chances are the maintainer(s) will just abandon their job. Bit
rot sets in and if no new maintainer takes responsibility sooner or
later people will start to complain about that code.
And last but not least it's a matter of paying respect to the
maintainer. He or they are doing a job for the benefit of the
community. I think they can excpect to be asked before someone starts
editing the code. It would be another matter if you just take the
code, change it and either not publish it or publish it as a new
package.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Amen.<br>
I agree with the vast majority of posts: if a team creates or maintains
code, it's up to the team to maintain and make it available to the
public. Reports to mantis should be reviewed by the team and the team
decides how to accommodate the defects. Same applies to one individual.
I would feel that I'm stepping on someone's toes if I "fixed" something
and put it back as the fix. If it's my private image, that's completely
different.<br>
<br>
I think this is a no brainer. Don't know why it's such a heated
argument. (there must be more to it than I see)<br>
brad<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Brad Fuller
(408) 799-6124
** Sonaural Audio Studios **
(408) 799-6123 West San Jose
(408) 799-6124 Cambrian
________________________________
Hear us online: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.Sonaural.com">www.Sonaural.com</a>
See me on O'Reilly: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/2184">http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/2184</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>