> 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.

Ralph?

>
>> 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.

good

>
>> 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.

Ralph?

>> 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 do not need to have them available for everybody. I just hope that  
VPR is making a backup.

> We could black
> those out, but then I don't see much difference between those scans  
> and
> a simple list of names.

It was just in case you get an earthquake in california and since we  
are in the digital
age duplication is easy. You could encode them not put them on the  
web but having them backed up
somewhere. I was used to live at nice where they predicted an  
earthquake that would erase the city
from the map so I was used to send the code of my game (skweek  
elsewhere in france).


Stef