~sircmpwn/public-inbox

1

Don't sign a CLA: What about FSF paperwork?

Details
Message ID
<87fsey4pn9.fsf@disroot.org>
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
Is FSF's CLA bad enough?  It says that FSF won't ever make the software
nonfree (IIUC), and also grant the contributor to use their work as they
see fit.

-- 
Akib Azmain Turja, GPG key: 70018CE5819F17A3BBA666AFE74F0EFA922AE7F5
Fediverse: akib@hostux.social
Codeberg: akib
emailselfdefense.fsf.org | "Nothing can be secure without encryption."
Details
Message ID
<CO4IFKS8DM5W.1HANS0XADC4H2@taiga>
In-Reply-To
<87fsey4pn9.fsf@disroot.org> (view parent)
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
I probably would not sign the FSF CLA, and not all GNU projects require
it -- GCC for instance. I also would not assign copyright to the FSF. I
still strongly prefer the DCO approach. That said, it's much better than
most.
Reply to thread Export thread (mbox)