3 ms·
With the CLA in place, it doesn't matter. All contributors already gave hashicorp a broad license for everything that they don't already own, so hashicorp has l
by kj4ips 3y ago
With the CLA in place, it doesn't matter. All contributors already gave hashicorp a broad license for everything that they don't already own, so hashicorp has license to largely do whatever regardless of what license they use to offer it to others.
- josephcsible 3y agoOnly the code in HashiCorp's own code is covered by the CLAs, not the code in the third-party dependencies it has. If said dependencies used copyleft licenses like (A)GPL instead of pushover licenses like MIT, that would have prevented what HashiCorp did.
- _msw_ 3y agoThe CLA was put in place in December of 2018 [1]. Presumably contributions made before that were under inbound=outbound terms [2], meaning the contributing author licensed their exclusive rights under MPL 2.0, which is a file-based copyleft license. (see the chart at [3]). [1] https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/introducing-a-cla https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/introducing-a-cla [2] https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-terms-of-service#6-contributions-under-repository-license https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-t... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License_compatibility#Compatibility_of_FOSS_licenses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License_compatibility#Compatib...