[Emerging-Sigs] GPL SID Change (was The New Rulesets are Ready!!)

Mike Lococo mikelococo at gmail.com
Thu Oct 14 16:50:45 EDT 2010

On 10/14/2010 03:34 PM, Matthew Jonkman wrote:
> In my opinion though, it's kid of "stealing" the sigs to pull them
> from gpl, re-sid them and redistribute them as our own. It just feels
> dirty. I don't like that route personally.
> If we have to we will, but I'm hoping for something better.

I understand the impulse to avoid forking the GPL rules, and there might
be lots of ways that ET and the VRT could cooperate to avoid doing so.
Agreeing on a maintainer for the GPL rules with a clear
upstream/downstream relationship would make the gpl/nogpl scheme much
less bothersome provided that downstream is simply syncing to upstream
and contributing changes through them.

On the other hand I don't see a fork as inherently dirty or malicious if
you can't formalize the upstream/downstream relationship.  The GPL
allows forks for exactly this kind of scenario when two groups are
working in the same area and don't (yet) have a mature governance
framework for handling areas of overlap.

If you fork at all, though, clearly I favor one that is clean and
complete over an informal agreement that passes responsibility for
reconciling the overlap on to end-users.

Mike Lococo

More information about the Emerging-sigs mailing list