On 17. 01. 19 12:59, Randy Barlow wrote:
On Thu, 2019-01-17 at 11:13 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Why do Fedora upstreams enforce this?
I enforce the DCO in Bodhi. I started doing it after attended a talk by
Richard Fontana where he suggested it as a way to be explicit about the
license of contributions (i.e., not just the license of the project).
My memory is now a bit hazy, but I think there was some discussion
about how many projects work under the assumption that the license of
contributions is equal to the license of the project (sometimes stated
as "license in, license out", but that most do not make this explicit.
The DCO explicitly states that the contribution itself is granted to
the project under the same license that the project uses.
I'd be very interested to know how adding some random line to a commit message
grants an explicit license according to something that is not even linked from
the commit message :(
CCing legal.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
