Hi Adam, On Mon, 8 Dec 2014, Adam Hunt wrote:
> There's another option on the table that would allow a potential > license change to be put off for some time while still being able to > do it with minimal headache down the road. Any license change is > obviously going to require all the past contributors to agree to it so > what about keeping the LGPL license for now and asking those > contributors and future contributors to sign an SLA. One of the > downsides to an SLA is that a legal entity (e.g. RIOT e.v.) would have > to be created and managed. > we thought about this. In the current context, this will only help in case of relicensing. However, relicensing will require a lot of resources, which we should spend in technical development. Even with a BSD/MIT license, creating a legal entity and deploying a CLA should be part of our agenda. Cheers matthias -- Matthias Waehlisch . Freie Universitaet Berlin, Inst. fuer Informatik, AG CST . Takustr. 9, D-14195 Berlin, Germany .. mailto:waehli...@ieee.org .. http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/~waehl :. Also: http://inet.cpt.haw-hamburg.de .. http://www.link-lab.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
