From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id IliBF/Z8cWYNqjwAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2024 08:26:30 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=r7RX4ZQv; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4EB531E0C1; Tue, 18 Jun 2024 08:26:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 391051E030 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2024 08:26:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0CDB3882ACB for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:26:27 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C0CDB3882ACB DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1718713587; bh=oQ+xYgN0OUkHzXbWwr7qhw0FCbecKJgDnC0pK68dre8=; h=Date:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=r7RX4ZQvim/WYd3I7wv11UvndGeIdYkZkWDtRfgyW9OAeplPyrfnDlZ3dfJz+g6ff Ou5yTUdXClsD3/FwrhsbNeHEFuHH1/CSHYhZRpczKomefUoHcHla6IlBRqkjPlQe2F 4gkkTgC8rEoZCuUWfd+RT91+xo8qJ8H3gjp2ocj0= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E58493882AE6; Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:25:43 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org E58493882AE6 ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org E58493882AE6 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1718713545; cv=none; b=e2BBS8bWcQy5qHadL72/l1nRzhncPeOY/9+HV/fZpGkuhupAqSGTNxw10yD8GSy3ZoEsGq4+1+i+/2Zp+pzjYauHqs4s8H3aux+dUmqHpN4pC+G4wyMrmeoCJX7UzkAXduxtOLh5MqDRLb/R+eD3wZiTxz98iySN8bLhMpMX8R4= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1718713545; c=relaxed/simple; bh=At221FLv/1DrbT8wuE3z/LRmGKzVbOtLgx9kVsjBh28=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:Message-Id:From:To:Subject; b=FLec40zFPTYA8WsyK4M7tddbp06W3pMpHqhyqxIyvW/2sFiYisZvHH6xx/y2VW4/083m2z8vKuOOBelagQYbF84f5Fb4Ur2T1YKa+gAkBNRvvY2yBSjVJIhncdJTZLQm93FpsOXLrLYvb/iHtTngoBCsaH8QfTxdzIqtGQk3e/c= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sJXuB-0002R6-34; Tue, 18 Jun 2024 08:25:43 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 15:25:11 +0300 Message-Id: <86ed8uqvyw.fsf@gnu.org> To: Guinevere Larsen Cc: pinskia@gmail.com, gdb@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: (message from Guinevere Larsen on Mon, 17 Jun 2024 16:48:13 -0300) Subject: Re: DCO: Was: Re: Contributing to gdb References: <86538dac-6c3a-4b9e-9de9-3906e645fa4d@redhat.com> <86sexbr0mb.fsf@gnu.org> <0bd8f510-8782-4052-880c-39232e69b432@redhat.com> <86r0cvr00e.fsf@gnu.org> <7c9378e8-287d-4d35-b294-3c112bb8fe1b@redhat.com> <86o77zqs1b.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" > Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 16:48:13 -0300 > Cc: pinskia@gmail.com, gdb@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org > From: Guinevere Larsen > > On 6/17/24 4:37 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > That's not an excuse. And you can ask me to do that. I will make > > time for it, exactly as I make time to review documentation patches > > here, and as I make time to explain this stuff to contributors to > > Emacs. > > Then I suggest you add your name and email to the wiki, where the people > that never even get to the point of interacting with us will find it to > ask for questions. > > https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ContributionChecklist#FSF_copyright_Assignment I don't mind, but I didn't see any names and emails mentioned there. Did I miss something? > > Anyone who wants to discuss this seriously should first read the > > gnu-prog-discuss discussion of these issues, from June 2021 (it went > > on all the way through July). > > > Telling someone who actively asked to learn more that "ok, go read those > email threads" without any convenience like saying the subject to search > for it easily, or the archive where I can look for it, and furthermore, > I am forced to subscribe to a list I frankly do not care about just to > see the discussion you consider required reading before even accepting > to have a conversation is a very unhelpful way to explain anything for > anyone. This must be some grave misunderstanding. The discussion to which I pointed was a very long one, took more than a month, and expecting me (or someone else) to summarize it is unreasonable, even if you ignore the possibility that a summary might omit aspects that are important for you, let alone the time required to produce such a summary. The gnu-prog-discuss list had a very small number of threads in June 2021, so I thought finding the right one would be a no-brainer. But since it sounds like I was mistaken, I apologize; here's the link to the beginning of that thread: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/private/gnu-prog-discuss/2021q2/016757.html The subject of the thread is, unsurprisingly, "Copyright assignments". It also points to related discussions on GCC, glibc, and Gnulib lists. The reason I think a serious discussion of this should start by reading that one is that it doesn't sound a good investment of everyone's time to re-iterate all the arguments which were already brought forward there and discussed from every possible aspect. I apologize for not making myself clear earlier, and hope I made myself more clear now: there was no intent to be unhelpful, just an attempt to be efficient by pointing to a very extensive discussion of this and related topics.