Developer.blender.org - Call for comments and participation

I highly doubt that this project would ever accept completely anonymous code contributions, for legal reasons. It is important to ensure that any added code is actually free software, so we need real people to sign off as such. If that is an “absolute bare minimum” requirement for you, then this project might not be a good fit for you. LOL

1 Like

What’s wrong with people using a pseudonym if they want to? Tons of other free software projects’ commit histories are full of pseudonyms and they’re fine in terms of legal troubles.

That should be easy to find yourself with a simple Google search, so no need to fill this thread with off-topic discussion of something that is irrelevant to this project. If you really think it unfair that we don’t currently accept anonymous contributions then you could always start a new topic, however fruitless that would be.

In other words: “There is no issue, but why not waste time trying to look for some?”

Free software projects have accepted contributions under pseudonyms for decades. People using a pseudonym are “real people”. There is no issue.

No, in other words this is our current policy and is therefore unrelated to the topic at hand. Start a new topic if you want to debate why Blender and the Linux Kernel do not accept anonymous contributions.

3 Likes

Okay, however the point still stands that the software and services utilised must still be usable over Tor.

Which still does work currently, though. It won’t be continued but it’s not lost or shut down from one day to the next. I think there is a difference between seeing the strong necessity to switch and being really forced to. Any proprietary plattform can be shut down or changed in its TOS at any point and make yet another switch mandatory. Look at what Autodesk did with Softimage just a few years ago (buyout, shutdown, won’t activate any more), or how Marvellous switched to a pretty restrictive subscription only one day to the next. Epic acquired Artstation and Soundcloud. Buyouts and TOS changes happen all the time and are currently way too unpredictable. I think Brecht also mentioned that they simply bring the risk that Blender could from one day to the other be forced to switch plattforms again. I completely agree here.
That is the risk with all proprietary software used. Sure, some are more at risks than others but it’s still the case. I absolutely agree that the requirement for the plattform needs to be free and open source as well.

2 Likes

I absolutely agree that the requirement for the plattform [sic] needs to be free and open source [sic] as well.

Specifically, the software the Blender project chooses to self-host needs to be free (libre), and usable by contributors without running proprietary software, including proprietary JS sent in webpages. Personally I don’t mind if it is not also “open source”, although the likelihood is that if it is one, it will also be the other, so we may as well satisfy both requirements.

1 Like
6 Likes