Subject:
|
Re: License revision 1
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 14 Dec 2000 17:04:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
897 times
|
| |
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message
news:kuph3tcm65ren3nln4rnmea1kj9e64a95m@4ax.com...
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney wrote:
> > Which leads us to try to define the semi-mythical ldraw.org again :-) Its a • bit
> > tricky, but any suggestions? Will there be a leadership heirarchy, or a • panel
> > of contributors (which is an odd number) to govern LCAD? I think that this
> > should be defined if this license is to go into effect.
>
> How does the phrase "Ad-hoc, self-selected totalitarian committee" sit with
> you? ;)
Hehe..
Well given the nature of LCAD, its pretty difficult to select who is going to
lead. But on the other side, having a panel of say 5-9 people who 'govern' LCAD
might not be such a bad idea. What would happen if LDraw.org decided to collect
donations for projects? For one, I am not comfortable handling (managing) large
amounts of group money, so there creates a need for some sort of treasury, and
there would need to be a governing body over that treasury.
It sounds like if it was handled wrong it could get messy. The idea of any
governing body over LCAD would be for its guidance and proper use, and the
proper use of funds to promote LCAD. Not to be exclusionary or to step on toes.
But I don't think there's going to be a way around it without a few people
feeling that way. Any suggestions? I think that the pros outweigh the cons in
creating some sort of panel, where none is the 'leader' but all can disucss and
vote on issues which will benefit LCAD.
> > > I'd rather not rev the license document every time we get a new author.
> >
> > Good idea. Steve, you should put yourself in there as well, IMO.
>
> I am. Don't you see me? "Authors are listed in the parts files they
> contributed to."
But you also run the parts update...so shouldn't you get an individual mention
like the rest of us there? I think you should, but if you don't want to, I
understand.
BTW - we're really close to the next big release at LDraw.org - only one thing
needs to be put in place. I hope it will all be online tonight, but the final
piece is not under my control. I think everyone will like it :-)
--
Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com
http://www.ldraw.org - Centralized LDraw Resources
http://www.zacktron.com - Zacktron Alliance
ICQ: 23951114 - AIM: TimCourtne
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Ldraw.organization (was: License revision 1)
|
| (...) I think it would be sufficient if we officially accept our somewhat anarchic approach. Basically, we could have (appoint, elect) specific officer positions, such as 'server admin', 'primary evangelist', 'parts library administrator', 'innocent (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: License revision 1
|
| (...) All the rest of you are exceptions, who have to be listed out, because you haven't written any parts. Actually, I should double-check that Jacob and Terry *don't* have their names in any part files. Anyway, I think I'm leaning against that (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: License revision 1
|
| (...) For points made previously in the thread, I think. Basically, I think if our aim is to free users/distributors/developers to use the library however they want, forcing them to release source code is a *big* contradiction of the aim of the (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
45 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
