[dmd-internals] DMD copyright assignment

[David Nadlinger via dmd-internals]

On 26 Jun 2014, at 18:07, Jonathan M Davis via dmd-internals wrote:
> I confess that before this discussion I had no idea that by 
> contributing to
> dmd, contributors transferred copyright to digital mars, […]

That's because, indeed, they didn't transfer copyright that way. The 
prevailing legal opinion is that this requires adding an extra step to 
the contribution process, such as filling in a form that explicitly 
states that copyright assignment is taking place.

> […] so it's not like Walter is asking that the
> copyright for already contributed code be transferred.

In fact, he did exactly this a few weeks ago in private to be able to 
change the license to Boost. All the current contributors were happy to 
agree, because it indeed was a simple way to handle the situation. This 
also includes me and the all the others who argue that requiring 
copyright assignment going forward is a mistake.

> But it doesn't sound like the question of assigning copyright for 
> druntime or Phobos is even on the table […]

Andrei argued for it earlier, but I think it's off the table now, yes.

> From the sounds of it, all that Walter is requesting is that we 
> maintain the status quo.

Just to make it extra clear: No, what Walter is requesting adds an extra 
barrier to the contribution process compared to the status quo. This is 
not the controversial part. The debate is over whether that is a good 
idea or not.

Cheers,
David