[erlang-questions] Contributor License Agreement for pullrequests
Tue Nov 28 16:10:50 CET 2017
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.
More information about the erlang-questions