bazaar-ng copyright policy

[Mark Shuttleworth]

Aaron Bentley wrote:

> I don't see why legal defence requires a single entity.  In fact, as I
> understand it, gpl-violations.org has benefitted from the fact that
> there's no single entity controlling Linux.  Instead of having to get
> The Linux Consortium to commit to a GPL lawsuit, they only have to get a
> single Linux contributor involved.

Eben Moglen from the FSF said today at LCA that  linux would have been
much better off w.r.t. SCO if they'd had something like this from every
contributor. It was his comments that prompted me to ask Martin to
follow this process, especially since we're hopeful that baz-ng might be
considered for the kernel sooner rather than later, given the BK fiasco.

> Oh, and I assume that we can just do the copyright thing once, and not
> have to assign copyright every time we submit a nontrivial patch.

Yes, and I'm happy to accept gpg-signed-mail rather than a paper trail.
All it needs to say is that the code you are contributing is yours to
contribute, and that you are happy for Canonical to share copyright and
defend your copyright.

Cheers,
Mark