Craig Latta replied to Ron:
>> We should be getting and following real legal advice not guessing...
>>     
>
>      That's what we're doing. I'm in contact with Viewpoints' legal
> counsel, via Kim Rose, and with counsel at the Software Freedom Law Center.
>   
Ok - so one of those two has seen the actual contribution form that was 
sent, and the rest of the detailed plan, and confirmed it has the legal 
effect we are after? I ask because as a layman I had the following 
uncertainties about it:

********
A couple of comments about the agreement in case you send out more in 
the future:
1. It is not very explicit about what contributions I agree to license 
under the MIT license. Those in a released squeak-dev image? those ever 
released in any kind of public image? those ever sent to the mailing list?
2. In the same vein, it does not specify which contributions in a 
temporal sense: only past contributions? all future contributions? the 
text suggests to me that past contributions are meant, but this is 
implicit. If so, the text should include either a particular date or 
allow me to enter one.
********

Have these been considered by the board and counsel? If they are moot, I 
would be grateful for an explanation.

Thanks,
Daniel