fourstepper

joined 3 years ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
Hm, [@logseq](https://lemmy.ml/c/logseq) requires a contributors license agreement (CLA [#cla](https://mastodon.social/tags/cla) ) to sign over all contributor's code to the company, so does the [@jop in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

@joplinapp @logseq @obsidian Thank you for taking the time to reply here.

Hm, [@logseq](https://lemmy.ml/c/logseq) requires a contributors license agreement (CLA [#cla](https://mastodon.social/tags/cla) ) to sign over all contributor's code to the company, so does the [@jop in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

@joplinapp @logseq @obsidian Hi, to address your points:

  1. You mention if the license ever needs to be changed - what circumstances would warrant a license change, in your opinion? I would generally expect the license not to change
  2. In cases of both Apache and Signal the CLA one signs signs off the contribution to the respective foundations, not an LTD as is case with Joplin
  3. MIT (or other permissive licenses) re-licensing can be protected by a DCO https://developercertificate.org , (under point 4)
1
Hm, @logseq requires a contributors license agreement (CLA #cla ) to sign over all contributor's code to the company, so does the [@jop (mastodon.social)
 

Hm, @logseq requires a contributors license agreement (CLA #cla ) to sign over all contributor's code to the company, so does the @joplinapp, with @joplinapp also having the server component source-available.

@obsidian is closed-source, wants $50/yr for a commercial license, paired with their $10/mo for sync - that's a lot of dollars for note taking.

Alternatives, anyone? Ideally open source to which I can contribute financially, without a CLA that will inevitably mean a change in licensing.