--On Wednesday, January 6, 2021 9:01 PM +0200 Дилян Палаузов
<dilyan.palau...@aegee.org> wrote:
Rather than requesting explicit actions, I would prefer something
implicit. E.g. creating a LICENSE file, that acts as "GENERAL TERMS":
once you contribute, you agree implicitly to the general terms.
It doesn't work that way. It's not just about conforming to the license,
it's about releasing their rights to the project. That has to be done in
some explicit method, which is why CLAs, IPRs, exist.
As described via Wikipedia
The purpose of a CLA is to ensure that the guardian of a project's
outputs has the necessary ownership or grants of rights over all
contributions to allow them to distribute under the chosen license.
Longer term, this potentially allows for doing something like changing a
license, if a project feels that's necessary. OpenSSL had to go back and
contact *every person* who had ever contributed to the project to relicense
OR rip out the contribution to do their relicensing for 3.0 because they
hadn't always had a CLA/IPR process in place.
Regards,
Quanah
--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Product Architect
Symas Corporation
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
<http://www.symas.com>
------------------------------------------
Cyrus: Devel
Permalink:
https://cyrus.topicbox.com/groups/devel/T9066d56fe70247f8-M4bf78d656f91bbd32b04f8df
Delivery options: https://cyrus.topicbox.com/groups/devel/subscription
