Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider a more complete CLA #42

Open
JayFoxRox opened this issue Jan 11, 2020 · 6 comments
Open

Consider a more complete CLA #42

JayFoxRox opened this issue Jan 11, 2020 · 6 comments
Assignees

Comments

@JayFoxRox
Copy link

I feel like this should have a proper Contributor License Agreement which gives you more rights to relicense in the future.
So if #7 or something go through (now or in the very distant feature), then you don't have to contact all the original contributors (Remember MAME?).

Even now it's getting problematic to reach out to contributors because GitHub doesn't demand a proper e-mail address in commits + it doesn't allow PMs + some people only use nicknames in the contributor file.

Software like https://cla-assistant.io/ could also be used to automate this step, to avoid situations like #29 (comment)

The issue with CLAs would be that some people are passionately against them; however, the same goes for the current license and the very lighweight CLA that already exists, so I don't think a more complete CLA would be problematic. I'm also not convinced that the existing lightweight CLA is even legally binding (same for the license). #notalawyer

@flibitijibibo
Copy link
Collaborator

I’ll leave this one up to Terry, since ultimately he’s the holder of the rights... this isn’t quite on the scale of something like Chrome or .NET, and I don’t expect to see this make any huge waves in the future like MAME, so our checkboxes should at least be sufficient, even if it’s not terribly verbose. The license was made with counsel so it should at least be valid (minus the issue in #8).

@purpleidea
Copy link

CLA's are harmful. FYI. Search that phrase on DDG and you'll see many examples.

@flibitijibibo
Copy link
Collaborator

@purpleidea This report is for improving the existing system, not whether or not we will use one.

@Moth-Tolias
Copy link

off topic, but @purpleidea what phrase are you refering to?

@JayFoxRox
Copy link
Author

JayFoxRox commented Jan 16, 2020

@Moth-Tolias Presumably "Contributor License Agreement" - it's a much debated topic; this project already has one.
@jakeNiemiec Presumably, DDG is duck-duck-go (a websearch engine).

@leo60228
Copy link
Contributor

leo60228 commented Sep 2, 2021

Keeping the current agreement but using cla-assistant would be nice. It's definitely not a huge deal, but it's kind of annoying having to remove the Basic Stuff and check the legal agreement for each PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants