snapd contribution license
patola at gmail.com
Wed Jun 15 14:41:40 UTC 2016
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 1:56 AM, thgntlmnfrmtrlfmdr <
thgntlmnfrmtrlfmdr at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The ability to license
> something as non-open in the future doesn't change the fact that what is
> currently released is open.
> Right, but it *does* make it not copyleft. So is that really what it's
> doing or am I reading it wrong? Not that permissive is bad, I just want to
> know. Because it seems like they are making everyone's contributions
> essentially permissive open source. So if you wanted to contribute copyleft
> code to snapd, you couldn't. Also, I still don't know if *only* Canonical
> has that right to relicense contributions.
Aren't you mixing things up? The CLA is *not* a license. It is an
agreement for licensing, so by itself it is not "open-source" or
"proprietary" - these terms do not apply.
Cláudio "Patola" Sampaio
MakerLinux Labs - Campinas, SP
Gmail <patola at gmail.com> - Mail EAD <patola at techtraining.eng.br> -
MakerLinux <patola at makerlinux.com.br> - YOUTUBE
Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/patolinux> - Facebook da MakerLinux
<https://www.facebook.com/makerlinux> - Lattes
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss