The open source movement was always about "free as in labour." Now we're reaping the rewards of thinking it was a good idea to listen to esrhttps://twitter.com/benbjohnson/status/906209090371698688 …
For me it was very different. It was saying to people who contribute: I don't retain right to exploit your work in ways you can't.
-
-
Copyleft+CLA inherently gives "official" upstream gross imbalance of power vs contributors. Even without CLA, that can happen if...
-
...all the value of contribution lies in testing, bug reporting, popularizing, etc. rather than submitting code/patches subject to ©.
-
Should say copyright assignment instead of CLA. Lots of projects have a harmless CLA simply agreeing to what's usually just assumed.
-
i.e. you explicitly agree to make your code available under the license used by the project, but still retain ownership of your code.
-
When I say CLA I mean something beyond that bare minimum that can be reasonably assumed when someone submits a patch.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.