Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Signing off.
Re: Signing off.
From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 17:03:50 +1100
/me throws head in the ring...
firstly i dont understand why you would want to stay annonymouse.. i
like the egoboost of seeing my name on the web :D
of course, i dont dont see what the big deal is.. so put him down as
gl or mickey mouse, i mean, whos to say thats not his real name? also,
like it matters?? i mean, if we put down our real name and submit a
patch which later turns out to be idiotic are the devs gonna find us
and hunt us down??
On 09/03/06, Matt Sicker <boards_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> gl wrote:
> > After Linus was about to commit one of my patches, it turns out the
> > project leaders are not willing to accept contributions under a
> > pseudonym. This may be normal in the GPL world, but for someone from
> > the Windows / BSD license world, this seems utterly bizarre. An
> > open-source project should be about contributions, and be as
> > accomodating as possible to the people it asking to contribute their
> > time and effort to. I have no problems following technical guidelines -
> > but I'm not about to compromise my personal choices for a project that
> > requires quality contributions to survive.
> > So, as the decision is apparently final I'm signing off. I guess my
> > various patches and WPS will either remain private, or will be released
> > independently at some point. Although if they're not going to get to
> > CVS, I don't really see the point.
> > I think you guys should debate whether this really is the best way to go...
> > --
> > gl
> Can't you just release your patches into public domain in order to work
> around the need to provide your name for all the copyright bullshit?
> Technically, it should work, and you can remain as anonymous as you wish.
> - --
> Matt 'Junx' Sicker
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on 2006-03-09