[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9be16b08-7aa9-d42e-24c0-f054af39b78a@petrovitsch.priv.at>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 02:41:12 +0200
From: Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...rovitsch.priv.at>
To: xDynamite <dreamingforward@...il.com>
Cc: "jonsmirl@...il.com" <jonsmirl@...il.com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, fche@...hat.com,
riel@...riel.com, ec429@...tab.net,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Code of Conduct: Let's revamp it.
On 25/09/2018 19:14, \0xDynamite wrote:
[...]
>>> So, is code a *published* item? Most of the public can't read it.
>>
>> I cannot read (or understand) neither Russian nor Chinese nor almost any
>> natural (let alone dead) languages of the world. I'm pretty sure that
>> I'm not the only one;-)
>> Does that make Russian literature non-public? I don't think so ...
>
> You confuse the issue. My definition included "intended for the
> public". But it isn't clear that open source code is intended for the
Well, then I have to repeat myself: Signed-off source code (in form of
patches) in a well-known programming language for a (nowadays)
well-known GPLv2 licensed project mailed on "everyone can subscribe"
mailinglists, (thus) to be found in several $SEARCH_ENGINE-indexed
mailinglist archives, if accepted to be found in lots of publicly
accessible git repos can be not intended to be published?
I wonder what else must happen.
> public -- it is intended for those who code or wish to.
MfG,
Bernd
--
Bernd Petrovitsch Email : bernd@...rovitsch.priv.at
LUGA : http://www.luga.at
Download attachment "pEpkey.asc" of type "application/pgp-keys" (1779 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists