[Savannah-register-public] [task #7793] Submission of Opéra Libre

[Valentin Villenave]

Follow-up Comment #6, task #7793 (project administration):

Hi Sylvain,

as you can imagine, your answer does not make me as happy as I would have
expected... 

There's some kind of a paradox when you say, on one hand, "we'd need to
accept hosting other operas" -- hmm, I'm not sure how many similar projects
you can expect ;-) -- and on the other hand, "we lack existing documentation":
I bet you do, since the case is not really precedented, and therefore not
documented... hence my whole point was to make a first step in this
direction.

I can fully understand the matter of (insufficient) time. In LilyPond, where
we have very few active developers, this issue is always the crucial one.
Unfortunately, complex and sophisticated ideas tend to be postponed "sine die"
and my project request is one of those.

Hosting: yes, I already thought about tuxfamily and several others. However,
this has two downsides: first it does not help me solve my licensing issues
(by the way, thanks for your idea about the Debian guys, they definitely may
be helpful). And besides, as I already told you, what I was looking for is
some kind of legitimacy, some (symbolic) support to help me defend my point of
view and licensing choice when talking to
publishers/directors/foundations/government etc. Right now, I can't say I feel
very confident when confronted to criticism such as "you're just a foolish
young idealist", "you won't be protected at all if you go this way", "this is
pure crazyness", "there's no way we're gonna support this project" (I've
applied for several grants unsuccesfully so far), and so on.

Which is why I'd like to ask you if there's any chance I can speak with
anyone you'd happen to know at GNU.org, at the FSF or anywhere; in France, the
APRIL didn't answer me, and as for the other guys I've asked, the LilyPond
Foundation is not ready, and Mutopia is just a one-man project without any
legal background (plus he does not accept GPL-based licenses).

I should have mentioned earlier another solution I had considered: what if I
could use a *dual* license? e.g. keep the GPL unmodified for my source code,
and apply a CC-sa to the _music_ itself? There would be no real link between
the source and the "artistic" content, contrary to what I was initially
looking for, but maybe this would be more orthodox?

Thanks for having this conversation with me, by the way. Much more enjoyable
than the automatic mails that are usually sent on mailing-lists or hosting
services :)

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?7793>

_______________________________________________
  Message posté via/par Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/