[Harmony-Drafting] Harmony DCO

James Bottomley James.Bottomley at HansenPartnership.com
Sat Aug 6 13:37:58 UTC 2011


On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 23:12 +0100, Michael Meeks wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 13:27 -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
> > Now that we've shipped 1.0 for the CLA/CAA templates, would people be
> > interested in continuing with drafting DCO-style templates? I mentioned
> > the idea in a blog post, and others have expressed an interest.
> 
> 	Is there a need to mingle the Harmony brand with the Linux's DCO
> process ? is there something missing in the latter that is deficient,
> and/or could be improved on?

I don't think it's about branding or improving the DCO, I think it's
about explaining what it is (provenance affirmation, since no licence
can guarantee that) and why projects should adopt it (it's the perfect
complement to inbound=outbound licence) and perhaps the historical
background: the SCO trial.

> 	Can we not just point at the Linux DCO process and say "use that if you
> want it" :-) I'm personally nervous about applying the Harmony brand to
> very different things 'Java'-style ;-)

I think it would, but point to with explanation.  

James




More information about the Harmony-Drafting mailing list