Proposal: Use and Require CLA for QA Devel Project Contributions

Kamil Paral kparal at
Mon May 26 12:40:18 UTC 2014

> That being said, the kernel-style DCO [1] might be worth considering.
> Nothing fancy, just documentation that lists the DCO and says that by
> contributing code, you agree to its terms. I'm not sure we need to deal
> with signing off on code since we don't have a complicated merge
> process, though.
> This is almost no barrier to entry and reduces the possibility for
> folks to be confused about which license they're contributing under.
> Overall, I figure it covers most of the use cases we're interested in
> (other than possibly reverting back to an older license, which isn't a
> big deal) without causing un-needed problems.

I thought that the ability to revert to an older license was one of the reasons for the proposal. I'm not sure why it's not a big deal anymore?

Unfortunately I don't have any further comments or recommendations, because I'm utterly lost in this legal mumbo-jumbo, sorry.

More information about the qa-devel mailing list