[erlang-questions] Contributor License Agreement for pullrequests

[Tuncer Ayaz]

On 11/28/17, Richard Carlsson <carlsson.richard@REDACTED> wrote:

> There's not a huge difference as far as I can see. In particular, I
> don't see that a CLA necessarily suggests any copyright assignment,
> even if this is sometimes done.

Right, which is why I wrote "might". A less ambiguous wording would
be: "since some CLAs require copyright assignment".

Still, given that prominent CLAs have included a copyright assignment
clause, it's the first thing many contributors will wonder about when
they encounter a CLA requirement. Thus, I think that ditching the name
CLA in favor of DCO will communicate the agreement without generating
doubt or discouraging some contributors who see "CLA" and shy away.