This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-licensing
mailing list for the cygwin project.
Re: "Unusual" contribution licensing problems
- From: Brian Dessent <brian at dessent dot net>
- To: cygwin-licensing at cygwin dot com
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 15:23:27 -0700
- Subject: Re: "Unusual" contribution licensing problems
- Organization: My own little world...
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510202129470.495@lacos>
Érsek László wrote:
> after grepping the cygwin mailing list and my up-to-date cygwin
> installation for "nftw" and "fts_open", I thought that it could make sense
> (and fun) to implement nftw().
Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) the whole discussion is moot
because these functions were added to Cygwin several months ago by
Corinna: <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-cvs/2005-q3/msg00069.html>.
> Let me list some facts and guesses:
As for the rest of the question, I'm not a lawyer so I'll shut up. But
I do believe that one way or another, whether you are assigning the
copyright to Redhat, or abandoning all copyrights, you still need
something signed by both you and your company on file with Redhat before
they can accept patches.
Brian