This discussion (and disagreement) is exactly the reason why we need a CLA ASAP.
While consulting with a relevant legal counsel.
- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
Advanced Search
May 8 2023
Just some probably interesting notes :D
May 7 2023
Many people, myself included, contribute to open source projects under the assumption that my contributions will help serve a project which continues to be open source in perpetuity, and a CLA provides a means for the project maintainers to circumvent that.
Assumption here is key. The entire purpose of a CLA is to remove this assumption and clarify how contributions are managed. This post and disposition is based entirely around the organization receiving contributions will behave in an adversarial manner in the future. If the organization doesn't earn your trust then why trust them with your contributions?
May 6 2023
In T15121#8063, @avivey wrote:Any contribution to Phorge is implicitly covered by Apache 2.0, which allows re-licensing by anyone.
The CLA is only making this explicit.
Sorry if this unrelated, but this is an interesting partially-related commit:
Make sure Phorge is not hit by legal action because of your contribution
Rust Conduit Client/R4 is the first project in Phactory!
By not signing a CLA, you'd have to explicitly set a license for each contribution you make - i.e., every single revision would have to include an explicit license, or it could not be incorporated into the main code-base.
This is technically handled by item 5 in our license, but it's reasonable to assume nobody ever reads that.
May 5 2023
In T15121#3880, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:I honestly do not want to allow my contributions to be re-licensed, since this usually means that the repository owner wants to re-license that work under a proprietary license when needed. I don't accept that. Normal volunteers do not accept that. This is probably not what we want.
May 4 2023
Maybe this is the root problem:
I just want to note down that this stack trace has no sense to me:
May 3 2023
May 2 2023
May 1 2023
Apr 30 2023
Apr 29 2023
By the way it seems to me that this git security measure is completely nonsense for cases where the repository is highly-hardened and owned by root:root. I cannot imagine one single case where an user should not trust a git repository owned by root.
I did some digging yesterday around PHP versions.