Ben Finney writes:
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> writes:
Mark Lawrence writes:
People already use the bug tracker as an excuse not to contribute, wouldn't this requirement make the situation worse?
A failure to sign the CLA is already a decision not to contribute to the distribution
As someone who cannot in good faith sign the CLA, that characterisation is far from accurate: I would very much like to contribute to the Python distribution, and so have not decided as you describe.
Rather, I leave the matter of contribution undecided,
Whatever. In fact, the consequence of your failure to sign the CLA is that your code doesn't get distributed with any of the current Python releases, is that correct? Back in context, I don't see how placing a reminder to sign the CLA on the page makes your decision at that instant harder. I suppose it might deter you from submitting code that by policy shouldn't be included in the distribution, but might be useful to third parties. Whether such deterrence is a good thing or a bad thing would depend on how likely it was to be independently invented by some who is willing to contribute code, and whether you would try to enforce your copyright in the event that it resembled your code (in which case there would be an obvious case for infringement, with the burden of proof on the individual who is willing to sign the CLA). (By the way, what is your problem of conscience with the PSF CLA? Are you afraid that the PSF's obligation to use an "open source license" is not enforceable? You don't like the choice of Initial Licenses? Something else?)