On 11/30/2012 06:34 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
If you want just a basic git tree and and mailing list
infrastructure,
there's always
code.google.com.
I actually considered that possibility early on, since
code.google.com
does provide a very nice set of services for software projects. I
assumed that the need to use a Google account for some purposes might
be problematic for some potential participants (not that I don't have
more than one of those accounts myself).
Since it's not source code, and I'm
not sure what copyright license the draft license text itself is
under,
CC0. Of course if I really wanted to use Google Code I'd be happy to
designate the most permissive license available as the license of the
license text (e.g., the MIT license). However, I suspect that the OSPO
wouldn't consider
code.google.com suitable for a license drafting
project for various very good reasons. If I *really* wanted to use
code.google.com over all other possible alternatives I might
investigate that option, but I'm not there at the moment. :)
I don't know if you or others on this list would have issues
being
associated with Google, or whether they would have issues with any
kind of implied endorsement of copyleft, but perhaps that's an option
to consider?
I for one welcome our new Google overlords, but I expect other members
of this list would have some issue with it (though most of those
objectors would also object to GitHub).
Thanks,
- RF