Re: [PDO] Re: PDO 2: Request for Comments

On 28.01.2008, at 23:53, Bill Karwin wrote:

> Hi Derick, thanks for your thoughts on this issue.  May I offer some  
> responses.
>
> Derick Rethans wrote:
>> a CLA can *not* prevent [IP related issues].
>
> Right, a CLA is not intended to prevent IP conflicts.  That's the  
> responsibility of the contributor, just as in the traditional non- 
> CLA process used by PHP.
>
>> An example here is that
>> when one of the CLA-signed PHP developers talks at a conference  
>> with another person (that did not sign the CLA) on some PDO related  
>> issues, the ideas that this other person brings up can not be used  
>> as it's not own contribution.
>
> Not true.  You can't copyright ideas.  If you and I talk about an  
> algorithm, or even an API, and then we go home and each of us writes  
> our own code implementing it, now we each have our own IP and we can  
> both copyright our own work without conflicting with each another.

Bill is right here.

> However, patches from non-CLA signers must be treated carefully.  If  
> you want to use their code, you can ask the bug reporter to sign the  
> CLA and they can grant their patch retroactively.  We did this  
> regularly in the ZF project.

This is the issue Derick was talking about in this paragraph. Having  
to ask contributors of patches to sign a CLA is a hinderance to free  
and open development.

> This brings up the question of why is this so important for PDO?   
> After all, these users also use PHP itself, and numerous other OSS  
> projects that don't use a CLA.  This is a good question, and I'm not  
> sure the answer is clear.

Well like I said before, I do not get CLA's. They either put  
rediculous burdens on the contributor or they offer no protection.  
This CLA does not improve the protection against copyright violations  
for all I see, nor does it protect against patent trolls (just makes  
their life slightly harder) or accidental patent violations.

>> This is not what Open Source is about. It's not only about being  
>> able to use code freely, it's just as much as making it easy to  
>> contribute back.
>
> This is similar to a point made on another blog yesterday, and I'll  
> respond as I did there:
> I don't currently have cvs commit privileges on php.net.  If I ask  
> for access purely on the principle of freedom to enhance the code,  
> would I be granted those privileges?  Probably not.  So does this  
> mean that PHP is not open-source?

I also replies there. Restrictions on commiting to php.net are simply  
a question of technical questions. These will of course also be  
relevant to PDOv2. The CLA however adds a legal hurdle along with the  
technical hurdle. That is what people are criticizing. So your  
comparison is flawed.

regards,
Lukas