This is one of the reasons open-source-but-not-open-contribution is becoming more common. If you don't accept code contributions you don't have to worry at all

This is one of the reasons open-source-but-not-open-contribution is becoming more common. If you don't accept code contributions you don't have to worry at all about where that code ultimately came from, which could be an expensive legal problem further down the line. Not-open-contribution is what I'll be going with if any of my nascent projects get to the point of having something I'm prepared to release for public consumption. I know I'm potentially losing out on help, but I'll be keeping as full control as possible of my stuff⁰. Found a bug: document it to me, and I'll fix it. Desperately want to fix it yourself because I'm not fast enough, or you just _really_ want to? Fork. Want to implement a new feature that I'm not planning or that I'm being too slow on for your needs? Fork¹, and if you are nice about it² I'll forward on anyone else wanting that feature to your project. -- [0] useful should I decide to alter the license(s) it is available under etc. [1] or, if you don't want to be constrained by my licensing terms for my code, which are most likely AGPLv3, that get included in your project, clean-room reimplement (or release as patches initially, slowly replacing my code completely, and then relicense once all my stuff is replaced, similar to what LAME did for patent reasons) [2] trying to nag me to change my mind before you do so is not being nice about it: if I say “no” or “maybe later” then continuing to beg/nag/cajole is wasting my time