On 13 Aug 2016 04:53, "Nick Timkovich" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Might be wandering away from simply tacking on a license, but some related legalese: Is there some canned contributor license agreement (CLA) that could also be applied to make clear that contributors must license their contributions to the project(s) in kind? Python has it's own ( https://www.python.org/psf/contrib/) but that seems very formal. Is there a simpler one that just makes it implicit that 'submitting a patch/PR = you agree to license that code to the project for redistribution" or whatever.
"Licence in = licence out" is the implied default for contributions when there's no formal contributor agreement to specify otherwise. (I'm not aware of any case law in any given jurisdiction to back that up, but it's a sufficiently well established practice that it's highly unlikely to ever be legally challenged) The PSF has a CLA for CPython because the licensing history and hence the associated licence are rather messy, and not something the PSF can use to accept contributions. Cheers, Nick.
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
