5 ms·
That ridiculous: "started cargo-culting the(totally unnecessary) CLA process" It's so they can re-license in the future. There are some projects with so many a
by darkarmani 11y ago
That ridiculous: "started cargo-culting the(totally unnecessary) CLA process"
It's so they can re-license in the future. There are some projects with so many authors that it is impossible to re-license because you need sign-off by every single person, even if it makes sense to re-license.
- stormbrew 11y agoFrom a contributer's point of view, the inability to re-license practically is often a feature, not a bug. CLAs make the worst case scenario touted by GPL advocates about non-GPL licenses practical: They can profit directly and exclusively from your work without your direct consent.
- richardfontana 11y agoAlso the ability to relicense an Apache License 2.0 work is relatively unimportant (compared to, say, the ability to relicense something under a more restrictive license like the GPL).
- carussell 11y agoI know CLAs let corps relicense. In fact, you'll find that I explicitly mentioned relicensing in the sentence immediately preceding that one... Can you explain what's ridiculous about the part of my comment that you quoted?
- DasIch 11y agoThat's a feature. What is the point of contributing to a project, if someone else can effectively destroy all your work at their discretion?