2 ms·
Wouldn't your article then more accurately be "Don't sign a CLA without reading it and making sure you agree with what it says", which reduces pretty cleanly to
by akerl_ 8y ago
Wouldn't your article then more accurately be "Don't sign a CLA without reading it and making sure you agree with what it says", which reduces pretty cleanly to "Don't sign things unless you've read them and agree with them"?
Your overall point seems to be one I agree with, which is "CLAs can be (and often are) used to enable maintainers to make decisions that contributors wouldn't want to be made, and contributors should thus be careful in what they agree to", but in making it an imperative headline it's lost the nuance.
- Sir_Cmpwn 8y agoWell, I could make a CLA which asks you to remember to drink your Ovaltine, which would be pretty harmless. But the average CLA is far from harmless, so it deserves special mention to call out these CLAs as harmful. Some CLAs are worse than others, though, and as people send me examples of supposedly benine CLAs I've been writing up addendums to add to the bottom of the article. There is indeed some nuance here, which I hope to address in that manner.