Contributor agreement
Stephen J. Turnbull
stephen at xemacs.org
Tue Jan 26 20:21:34 GMT 2010
Martin Pool writes:
> I kind of see your point, and yet this is a bit of an odd
> proving-nonexistence situation. This is not so much a bug in the
> agreement as a desire that Canonical not believe that email sent by
> you is actually from you.
Wrong. It is a bug in the agreement; it makes Canonical a potential
weapon for people who want to do a third party harm. The issue is
negligence, not any harm directly caused by Canonical.
> Our main concern is with the burden on the contributor: _I_ am
> perfectly happy to verify gpg signatures with trust chains, but
> this would make it hard on many contributors.
Ask for the signature, and if they say "no can do", then explore other
possibilities. I find it hard to believe that it really would be a
big problem for many Bazaar contributors.
> At any rate if you can think of a better solution I would be happy
> to hear it.
Get a power of attorney to represent me in cases where my copyright is
questioned or infringed, instead of an assignment. :-)
More information about the bazaar
mailing list