[Zope-dev] We need to change how code ownership works.

[Lennart Regebro]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Charlie Clark
<charlie.clark at clark-consulting.eu> wrote:
>>  https://github.com/popular/starred
>>  i doubt that github i willing to get into the doghouse by doing really
>> nasty things - and thus getting into risk of loosing projects.
>
> This is pure speculation, or are you privy to board decisions at Github.

Yet again, I point out that the nastiest thing they legally can do is
spamming your email address.

> I raised a specific objection: that the onus is on anyone with a Github
> account to demonstrate their code does not violate any patents in the case
> of a claim feels like a pretty real threat to me.

If you are on Github or not makes no difference. Github has that
clause to protect themselves if somebody else hosts copyright or
patent protected code. It means, should Zope violate any patents and
Github get sued because of this, the Zope Foundation needs to pay any
damages. If we host it ourself, the *we* get sued, and need to pay the
damages anyway.

Hence Github or no Github yet again makes little, if any, difference.

> Again, as Jens has repeatedly said we should not conflate the separate items
> of toolchain and service provider. Zope Foundation has hardware and a proven
> track record in hosting. Is anyone actually criticising this?

This is not about git vs svn. It's about using external services, with
all the benefits this gets us, or not. And the arguments against are
so far mostly because of perceived legal problems with using an
external service. Problems that in fact either don't exist, or are
just as severe with self-hosting of the code.

//Lennart