Hacker News Reader

I'll accept a pull request with no CLA so long as the code is of decent quality.

If you accept contributions without a CLA, you are not the sole owner of the copyrights anymore and you cannot offer a proprietary paid branch, unless all contributors give you permission to relicense their AGPL code as proprietary.

View on HN

Yep, and I'm perfectly fine with this. If someone wants a non-copyleft branch, they can pay me to rewrite the features I didn't author, otherwise I will exclude the added code from said pull request.

Its a definite edge case, but if I can get active contributors, I am not about to ask them to sign a CLA.

Keeping track of and excluding commits authored by others seems a lot of work. I am curious if you use any kind of tooling or process to make it easier.

Not yet, but I hope it becomes an issue. IMO its not bad issue to have.

A bigger issue might be trying to filter anything that might be derivative of contributed work not covered by CLA.

Yes, I am not sure how I will do that. I guess it can create enough FUD to scare away any commercial client.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com