Fossil

Check-in [633830fe]
Login

Many hyperlinks are disabled.
Use anonymous login to enable hyperlinks.

Overview
Comment:Clarity tweak to the "why CLA + BSD" justification in the "Fossil vs Git" doc.
Downloads: Tarball | ZIP archive | SQL archive
Timelines: family | ancestors | descendants | both | bsd-vs-gpl
Files: files | file ages | folders
SHA3-256: 633830fe17d64b0f754b893faa3dc7d205a97c1880e31511b761c1db31fb2e6e
User & Date: wyoung 2019-07-12 13:58:51
Context
2019-07-12
14:15
Clarified the consequences of a CLA on Fossil and on FOSS projects in general in the "Fossil vs Git" doc. check-in: fffa6769 user: wyoung tags: bsd-vs-gpl
13:58
Clarity tweak to the "why CLA + BSD" justification in the "Fossil vs Git" doc. check-in: 633830fe user: wyoung tags: bsd-vs-gpl
13:57
Better text justifying the use of a CLA in conjunction with the GPL in the "Fossil vs Git" article. check-in: 838c9efe user: wyoung tags: bsd-vs-gpl
Changes
Hide Diffs Unified Diffs Ignore Whitespace Patch

Changes to www/fossil-v-git.wiki.

311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software|FOSS]
project, it's often dispensed with when there aren't other
considerations pushing the organization to require one.

Contrast a BSD-style project, where contributions are not automatically
relicensed merely by being distributed with the preexisting BSD code.
Such projects often require a CLA even when there is no corporate
overlord or commercial-use relicensing option. It is one way to ensure
that all contributions are compatibly licensed with the existing body of
code. It's a way to add a "no takebacks" clause to the basic BSD
license. The greater necesity for having a CLA in a BSD-licensed project
makes signing up new contributors harder.

Neither license affects the repository contents managed by either Fossil
or Git. Nevertheless, one can see a more GPL-oriented world-view in Git and a







|







311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software|FOSS]
project, it's often dispensed with when there aren't other
considerations pushing the organization to require one.

Contrast a BSD-style project, where contributions are not automatically
relicensed merely by being distributed with the preexisting BSD code.
Such projects often require a CLA even when there is no corporate
overlord or commercial-use relicensing option in order to ensure
that all contributions are compatibly licensed with the existing body of
code. It's a way to add a "no takebacks" clause to the basic BSD
license. The greater necesity for having a CLA in a BSD-licensed project
makes signing up new contributors harder.

Neither license affects the repository contents managed by either Fossil
or Git. Nevertheless, one can see a more GPL-oriented world-view in Git and a