Connecting Kallithea and RhodeCode

[Bradley M. Kuhn]

Dmitry Konchalenkov wrote:
>    Second, RhodeCode’s CLA does not require any copyright assignment.

There is very little policy-outcome-difference between a CLA like this one:
   https://rhodecode.com/rhodecode-cla
and a CAA.

It violates the concept of "inbound=outbound", a system of contribution that
was dubbed by that name by Richard Fontana.  It describes the model used by
Linux's DCO and many other projects.

The main issue is that the license that RhodeCode receives inbound from all
contributors is MIT, but the outbound license is AGPLv3.  This creates
inequity among contributors.  It allows RhodeCode to use the copyrights of
contributors in ways that would otherwise not be permitted by AGPLv3.

Kallithea uses inbound=outbound: every contributor contributes under
GPLv3-or-later, and distributes the project under that same license.

Here's one blog post by me and one by Richard Fontana that talks about some
of these concepts (although the blog posts are about the other topics on CLAs
too):
  https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2014/jun/09/do-not-need-cla/
  https://opensource.com/law/11/7/trouble-harmony-part-1
--
   -- bkuhn
========================================================================
Become a Conservancy Supporter today: https://sfconservancy.org/supporter