In the absence of a license agreement, the contribution is usually owned by
the submitter and not the project (copyright, see Berne convention). This
doesn't scale very well. A signed CLA allows the project to demonstrate
that the submitter has agreed to transfer ownership of the contribution to
the project('s administrators).
I wouldn't want a copyright-assignment system (since that allows the project to re-license when it wants, for example) but an inbound=outbound agreement (that is, an explicit agreement from contributors to have their contributions released under the license of the project) is not an unreasonable thing to do.
-- Stephen Paul Weber, @singpolyma See <http://singpolyma.net> for how I prefer to be contacted edition right joseph
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
