|
Top-level
@matrix Any reason Element couldn't sponsor development while still keeping it under Matrix.org umbrella? Sounds a whole lot better than forking and fragmenting the server ecosystem... Also Element should really drop the CLA requirement. A restrictive CLA is everything the culture around (F)OSS stands for. 2 comments
@bbhtt @matrix The reason for the shift is so that Element can dual-license the project to commercial forks who currently don't contribute back. This is also the reason for the CLA, to give Element the right to dual-license. The Foundation could have done the same thing, but is not remotely set up for selling licenses, and it'd put the Foundation in competition with Element, which would be nightmarish. Hopefully this is the least worst outcome. |
Gregory's Server
@bbhtt That's a question best directed at Element. The Foundation's position is that we'd prefer for the projects to remain under our auspices and unencumbered by a CLA.