Code written by the wrong people (was: Shipping plugins)

Ben Finney ben+bazaar at
Fri Mar 30 11:52:21 UTC 2012

Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer at> writes:

> Am 29/03/12 08:58, schrieb Vincent Ladeuil:
> > A few others that come to mind (I haven't checked them against the
> > rationale you give above though):
> >
> > - bzr-xmloutput,
> This has non-Canonical copyright holders.
> > - bzr-search,
> Has non-Canonical copyright holders.
> > - bzr-rebase ?
> bzr-rebase was renamed to bzr-rewrite. It has non-Canonical copyright
> holders.

The only reason “has non-Canonical copyright holders” is mentioned here
is, I assume, because of Canonical's stubborn insistence on having a
specially privileged position over other contributors to the Bazaar code
base <URL:>.

At what point does the number of problems – such as stalling on code
which would be good to include, is under exactly the same license terms,
but happens to be written by the wrong people – caused by this policy
become enough to demand that the policy be changed?

Please, Bazaar developers, convince Canonical that your project is being
hurt by this silliness, and move to the “inbound == outbound” copyright
policy of the vast majority of successful free-software projects

 \      “Actually I made up the term “object-oriented”, and I can tell |
  `\            you I did not have C++ in mind.” —Alan Kay, creator of |
_o__)                                        Smalltalk, at OOPSLA 1997 |
Ben Finney
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the bazaar mailing list