|
Top-level
 @matrix Haven't we learned anything from repeated CLA debacles? I welcome the license change to AGPLv3, but making future contributors sign a CLA means Element could change the license again to be no longer open source. Then the community would have to fork it again, like with Terraform and OpenTofu. I'm with Drew on this: https://drewdevault.com/2023/07/04/Dont-sign-a-CLA-2.html 7 comments
 @TheEvilSkeleton @skyfaller @matrix So does Qt. If your intention is to commercialise, perhaps consult with them. @TheEvilSkeleton @skyfaller @matrix for clarity: Fedora doesn't have a CLA. The Fedora Project Contributor Agreement essentially just sets default licenses for contributions: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/fpca/ @skyfaller @matrix I agree in general, but they could have relicensed right now to a proprietary license too, so the CLA doesn't really give them any new rights that they didn't have before. That said, the Element team being the primary contributors to the project is itself concerning. I do think that the structure of the Matrix protocol itself limits their ability to do harm thankfully.  @jfred @skyfaller We think this is a great opportunity for the ecosystem to shine, and highlight that the spec remains open source *and* under open governance – though we will also be the first to note that our governance needs improvement. Broadly speaking, we find it concerning when any major open source project is dominated by a single contributor. We look forward to channeling our resources to help improve the size and diversity of the contributor ecosystem in the months and years ahead!  You mean same like the structure of the W3C limits Google's ability to impose their own APIs? Well... @skyfaller Indeed, we'd prefer that these projects remain under our auspices, open source, and unencumbered by a CLA. For the avoidance of doubt, the Foundation's mission and rules forbid us from acting for the private benefit of any party, and as such we cannot contribute anything that requires us to sign a CLA wherein the assignment is made to a privately-held entity. We are committed to building up the open source commons around Matrix. |
Gregory's Server
@skyfaller @matrix keep in mind that CLAs vary from project to project. Some CLAs (like Fedora's) explicitly tell you that you own your copyright.
But yes, I certainly agree that they shouldn't be using a CLA.