[GRASS5] v.in.dwg license problem

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Fri, May 16, 2003 at 01:54:16PM +0200, Radim Blazek wrote:
> On Thursday 15 May 2003 05:19 pm, Bernhard Reiter wrote:

> > Part of my contribution to GRASS5.1 is running the infrastructure
> > and providing licensing and process counsel.
> > Both I continue to do and I consider it to be important.
> > So why would't I have a vote in this?
> 
> I know that and I appreciate that. 
> However, I am not so sure that gives you
> any rights to contributed software. 

I'm not the owner of the copyright, that's clear.
But I claim to do my share in the development of GRASS 5.1.
Usually in Free Software project people that actively help 
in one way or the other get a voice in crucial matters.

> There are free CVS servers available ...

You mean gratis hosting?
Sure there are other opportunities, 
but if you think that's all we are doing here at Intevation, 
I feel a bit offended!

> Do people running sourceforge.net 
> dictate what projects contributors should do?

Yes, in many ways they or others (like Savannah) do.
There are standards and conditions.

> As you could see, I took your opinion into account and I have done 
> some extra work for you. 

If you say you did it for me, that is nice.
My arguments were made to protect the legal situation of GRASS
and GRASS' future. I still hope to convince you based on arguments.

> And I'll do some extra work every day,
> when typing 'yes' during compilations, to remind me that GPL is bad.

If you want to avoid that extra "yes", write a script that does it
or a patch for yourself that removes that warning.
For other people than you it is very important
and I'm grateful that you've added it!
It even protects you and the GRASS team.

If we do this without a clear warning some people might bring
a law suit because they might _claim_ we suborn them to break GRASS'
license.

> Because I did not agree, I weighted your wish by your contributions,
> and fulfiled it partialy only.

I spend an considerable amount of time 
helping you understand this issue 
and you attack me on the bases that I'm a beggar,
because I didn't contribute enought in your eyes?
I cannot really understand that.

I'll understand that you are the active contributor to GRASS 5.1,
much more active than myself or others, you are more or less
the maintainer for GRASS 5.1 thus I'll have to accept your decision.
Still I disagree with it based on arguments.

> > I already help at least a bit as explained above,
> > thus you probably don't accuse me but somebody else.
> 
> Exactly, that is why I asked other developers if v.in.dwg should be moved.

I would be glad to hear some opinions on this.

> > Be reassured that I think that you are doing a great work on GRASS5.1,
> > but just because you are the most active developer on this
> > does not mean you should not be criticised!
> 
> Criticise, criticise! I am not talking about criticism, I am talking
> about decision making. 

You've mixed both in the past.
I was not forcing any decision I was giving and explaining arguments.

> I want to listen to other developers also. I won't do 
> anything which makes GRASS less usable and I don't agree with, 

With the same reasoning you could demand to make GRASS proprietory,
because only then you get enough "money" to finance the development.
We both know that this generalised arguments won't help
us solving the conflict.

> until we have general consensus about that. I won't do that only because
> you say 'we must' and repeate it 100 times.

I voiced my arguments, because I believe them to be strong.

> There are other problems where I should be realy criticised! Vector design,
> formats, code quality ... It's more difficult!

Licensing and strategy is more difficult than coding in general.
I put in less time in this for GRASS than you do your coding, though.

> In both cases, if somebody criticises, I expect that he suggests 
> something better and helps to realise that.

You can't punish somebody for voicing criticim, 
that would be like shooting the messenger.

In this case I've made suggestions to help the situation.

> It is maybe time to define decision making procedures for GRASS.
> Otherwise we start to quarrel. 

Post your arguments on the development list and reach consensus
among the developers. Otherwise you get a fork in the end anyway.

	Bernhard
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20030516/499c88a3/attachment.bin