[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SRFI-2 (and-let*) Implementation for Guile

From: Rob Browning
Subject: Re: SRFI-2 (and-let*) Implementation for Guile
Date: 22 Jan 2001 15:27:03 -0600
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7

I sent this to Oleg and Dale, but forgot to include the gnu addresses,
and I just wanted to keep you posted.  Presuming the guile developers
are interested, I'm going to try and get licensing straightened out
for as many SRFIs as possible, so they can be included in guile.

BTW, on the guile side, let me know if you know of SRFI's that are
already implemented so I don't bother with those (I'll probably also
check guile CVS at some point myself)...

To: address@hidden
Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
Subject: Re: SRFI-2 (and-let*) Implementation for Guile
From: Rob Browning <address@hidden>
Date: 22 Jan 2001 15:10:53 -0600
In-Reply-To: <address@hidden>
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7
Lines: 75
Xref: raven.localnet inbox:24025

OK, sorry for the long silence, but I've been side-tracked by various
other things.  I'd still like to get the srfi's into guile, and that
still requires clearing up the copyright issues, so it looks like
we'll need some paperwork from Dale and Olin.  Are you still up for

If so, I'll see about digging up the relevant details, and
faxing/mailing things wherever appropriate.


address@hidden writes:

> Hello!
> > If I understand correctly, Oleg would need to assign the copyright to
> > the FSF.
> It is OK with me, _provided_ that it is OK with the SRFI editors. The
> SRFI process requires the authors to include a specially crafted
> copyright notice. If it does not preclude me from assigning copyright
> to FSF, that's great. If it does, then something needs to be worked
> out.
> OTH, as far as I understand, copyright law does not protect an idea or
> a fact -- copyright merely protects a particular expression of an
> idea. The reference implementation in SRFI-2 is one expression of
> let-and*. Dale Jordan's implementation is another expression -- on
> which Dale Jordan owns his copyright.  As guile will include his
> implementation rather than mine, it is him who has to give
> permission. As far as I am concerned, the question of copyright may
> occur only when guile wants to include the SRFI-2 _document_ itself
> into its distribution. But the existing copyright on SRFI-2 already
> gives guile, or anybody else, this permission.
>       Cheers,
>       Oleg

Free Software Foundation <address@hidden> writes:

> Rob Browning wrote:
> > (Background for the FSF: Oleg wrote the reference implementation for
> >  scheme SRFI-2  There is no
> >  copyright listed in the code itself, but there is a copyright on the
> >  SRFI document which has a web link to the code.
> > 
> >  I contacted Oleg because I want to start adding SRFI implementations
> >  to guile, and I'd prefer to not have to re-write things from scratch
> >  if we can get the copyright issues resolved.)
> > IANAL but I think that since Dale took your implementation and modified
> > it, you still have to be involved in the copyright reassignment since
> > you're the original author of the derived work,
> That is correct.  You'll need assignments and/or disclaimers from Oleg, and
> from his employer at the time he wrote it (if the employers have not already
> disclaimed copyright in another way), and from anyone else who has modified
> the code since then.
> See the GNU maintainers guide for details on doing the
> assignment/disclaimers, and please let me know if you have additional
> questions.
> -- 
> Bradley M. Kuhn, Aide to Richard Stallman
> Free Software Foundation     |  Phone: +1-617-542-5942
> 59 Temple Place, Suite 330   |  Fax:   +1-617-542-2652
> Boston, MA 02111-1307  USA   |  Web:

Rob Browning <address@hidden> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]