Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > petere@postgresql.org (Peter Eisentraut) writes:
> > > > sslinfo contrib module - information about current SSL certificate
> > > > Author: Victor Wagner <vitus@cryptocom.ru>
> > >
> > > It was premature to add this: Bruce is still trying to get a copyright
> > > assignment out of the author.
> >
> > I got it this morning. The text they sent was:
> >
> > > > The copyright has to be removed so it can be copyrighted by the
> > > > PostgreSQL Global Development Group. Is that OK? We can still keep
> > > > your name and company at the top.
> > >
> > > Yes, it can be removed. I just wasn't aware that copyright transfer is
> > > neccessary. Most open-source projects don't have such a requirement, and
> > > individual portions of code are copyrighted by their respecitve authors.
>
> I still don't understand why is the copyright "assignment" needed at
> all. Is it even valid, given that the PGDG does not have a written/
> signed document? At least the FSF requires you to given them a written
> and signed statement to that effect. And if it's not valid, why bother
> doing it at all?
>
> Also, the code is released under BSD license, so why is it important if
> it says "Copyright Foo, Inc" or something else? We will be able to use
> it regardless of the copyright assignment, as will anyone else.
>
> One point may be that if PGDG doesn't have a "Copyright" line in the
> header, it can't then automatically increment the year in there when the
> time comes. Does this have anything to do with it? It may also have to
> do with when someone from PGDG fixes a bug in that code.
[ Patch author added as CC.]
I think we just felt that an explicit copyright to someone else in our
code could be confusing. I don't believe there is any fundamental
reason to remove it, but it just seems best to do that.
-- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
