List:Internals« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Masood Mortazavi Date:September 17 2009 5:07am
Subject:Re: Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742
View as plain text  

>> Just to make things clear: the particular problem in this case with the SCA is
>> that the _contributer_ does not feel that the SCA is sufficiently clear about
>> limiting the scope of exactly which development related to MySQL is
>> contributed to Sun and which is not.
>> This is the reason that the MCA adds an explicit clarification:
>>   "Each submission must explicitly be marked that it's donated under the
> MCA."
>> Now, in general I see other serious problems with both the SCA and MCA, and I
>> do not really feel like defending either of them. But for this (and similar)
>> small contributions, a clarification of the above point would greatly improve
>> the attractiveness of contributing under the SCA.
>> Hope this helps,
>>  - Kristian.

SCA rules are clear.

You can find out more about the SCA here:

No such positive declarations (opt-ins, of the type you mention above)
or negative declarations (opt-outs, which would be the necessary
complement of the opt-in you mention above) are required by the SCA.

This simplicity exists in the SCA for very good reasons, and it has
been tested in multiple project and open-source communities Sun
manages. See here:

As long as you are a signatory and are working on a
Sun-managed/owned/hosted project, your rights and Sun's rights are
clearly laid out rather than requiring constant redefinition and
declarations of one type or another (which the MCA you mention above
would allow although communities around it may not).

When a transaction becomes frequent, it should turn into a partnership.

SCA  creates that partnership between the contributor and the
community and the project owner.

You own rights to the code you contribute, and grant Sun (the owner of
the open-source project) the same rights.

So, for example, forums, including this one, fall into the
category of Sun-managed/owned/hosted project.

There may be some who may want to make malicious use of these forums
as a way to advertise their products and services or undermine the
operational effectiveness of these forums by demanding a special right
for constant opt ins and opt outs. However, that kind of behavior
should not be encouraged. (Closer examination shows that other open
source projects and communities would already shun such questionable
opt-in/opt-out behavior and models.)

There's no reason why should be any different.

SCA makes things clear and straight forward.

Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742Sergey Petrunya9 Sep
  • Re: Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742Jay Pipes9 Sep
  • Re: Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742Masood Mortazavi16 Sep
    • Re: Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742Vladimir Shebordaev16 Sep
      • Re: Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742Giuseppe Maxia16 Sep
    • Re: Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742Kristian Nielsen16 Sep
      • Re: Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742Giuseppe Maxia16 Sep
        • Re: Contribution: Fix for BUG#42742Masood Mortazavi17 Sep