What mangos forks allowed to be linked from forum?

[VladimirMangos]

Currently we not have policy for forks URL listing from forum.

What requirements for this?

I think we need setup some final requirement for case authors credits preserver at forks.

And add it as announcement at forum.

For example: http://github.com/beleko/evo-X-Core

All authors info removed from commits.

I suggest add rule: not allowed providing at forum links to like repo or any discussion or referecnes to like repos.

With temporary bans for posters and permanent bans to owners (if they not react at warning and suggestion fix this).

[XTZGZoReX]

I agree.

I don't have a problem with forks where author information is preserved; however, if people outright copy patches and commit them in their own name, and then reference their fork here, I don't think we should accept it. However, if author info is kept intact, I think it's ok, as it can be considered a friendly fork.

[NoFantasy]

Agree with both, get rid of the not-serious people that is not interested in improving what they do. Sure, honest mistakes can happen, but seeing a huge amount of commits, the owner is fully aware of what he is doing (for the example, he was already warned at scriptdev2 site), it's clear that they do not belong in a open-sourced community.

[freghar]

Well, do as you like.

I personally don't really like those people, but you can't possibly control the community at this level. It's their freedom to do whatever they want and whatever the license allows them to (and your freedom to ban them). I agree on ignoring those people, ignoring their help requests. However you might as well end with the same person posting different links to his repo / tons of bans and new users/proxies. Another thing is - how can you possibly classify a "not allowed repo link"? Will you go through all the commits to find missing infos about authors? What if somebody accidentaly paste such link? ... Or just the "obvious" ones?

As I've said - I would simply ignore them. Copying work from others like this was rather common at one time (not only in ancient culture), today's courts about "intelectual properties" give it rather negative image.

On the other side - they might not even realize it. Someone without project management experience can easily fall into this category. Almost everyone have tons of pulls and merges in their branches and such person just "wants to keep it clean" and forgets to mention the source in commit message.

I would even go as far as saying "it's acceptable as long as the person doesn't claim the work as his/her own", though an author reference is nicer.

edit: if it's about some "top 10" or list of *serious* forks, then I agree, some filter should be applied on those indeed

[NoFantasy]

It's impossible to enforce to full extend, but there are examples (like the one mentioned) where you inform the user that "hey, i see you make many commits in your fork, you should inform where they are actually from" and get a "fuck you asshole" back in your face.

It's about making an example, saying "we don't want you guys around here" and then teach (hopefully) the community what it is about. We can't be the police, but we can help some getting better at how they behave in a community like ours

[VladimirMangos]

license allows them

I think no license that allow drop author info

And i have examples when i point about problem and ppl fix repo to proper author data. I not suggest permanent ban as first reaction, but 1--2 day ban with warning can help

[XTZGZoReX]

I think no license that allow drop author info

This is partially correct.

The commits in a repository are not necessarily a "part of" a project, which means they are not affected by the GPL (any version). As long as there's author info _somewhere_ (i.e. the THANKS file), the license is actually not broken.

Of course, one could now argue that it's in bad taste not to include author info in commits, but the license doesn't care about that...

[freghar]

This is partially correct.

The commits in a repository are not necessarily a part of a "part of" a project, which means they are not affected by the GPL (any version). As long as there's author info _somewhere_ (i.e. the THANKS file), the license is actually not broken.

Indeed, I took a short look at files in src/game/ and they have their copyright header intact.