From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,deac256a05c84a59 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: DOM and SAX parsing in Ada References: <41900010.D28DD400@boeing.com> <9CWjd.17305$5K2.1356@attbi_s03> <1106223415.857525.176640@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <41F4DB6F.4090909@mailinator.com> <35nh12F4oe4caU1@individual.net> From: Brian May Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:14:28 +1100 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ayf/hraXnFNwbkTUDkKiZ17Phfo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: snoopy.microcomaustralia.com.au X-Trace: news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com 1106777635 202.173.153.89 (27 Jan 2005 08:13:55 +1000) X-Complaints-To: abuse@pipenetworks.com X-Abuse-Info: Please forward all headers to enable your complaint to be properly processed. Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news1.optus.net.au!optus!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.netspace.net.au!news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com!not-for-mail Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7996 Date: 2005-01-27T09:14:28+11:00 List-Id: >>>>> "Nick" == Nick Roberts writes: Nick> When I suggested that I wanted to make changes to the code, Nick> he indicated that those changes could not be merged back Nick> into the AdaCore CVS copy unless I signed a copyright Nick> assignment, in favour of either AdaCore or the FSF, to the Nick> latter of which I am agreeable. This is standard practise for GNU software too. In the past this type of requirement has been very controversial, and for example resulted in emacs being split up into emacs and xemacs (not sure what the current status is of this issue is). Nick> When I suggested that XML/Ada be moved to SourceForge, he Nick> indicated that it would have to be a separate project (a Nick> fork), whose changes could never, in practice, be merged Nick> back into the AdaCore CVS, because of the difficulty of Nick> getting all the contributors to sign the assignment. This is Nick> to the best of my recollection and understanding. The implication here is if you move the project to sourceforge, you can't control who contributes changes to the code. This is not true, even if you place a CVS repository on sourceforge (optional step) you can still control who has write access, and make sure the only people who have write access have signed the agreement. -- Brian May