[pydotorg-www] Licensing contributions (Was: Vanished link for AFL v2.1)

[Stephan Deibel]

anatoly techtonik wrote:
>> They need to use a license that lets the PSF take the code and change
>> the license on it to be the PSF license.  The PSF license doesn't
>> actually say re-licensing is allowed.  The Apache 2.0 and Academic
>> Free licenses both explicitly allow re-licensing, so that's why
>> contributors need to pick one of them.
>>     
>
> Does the sentence that Apache 2.0 explicitly allow re-licensing really
> mean that I can drop it or replace with GPL, MIT or put in Public
> Domain at all?
>   

No, the contributor agreement is what adds the right to relicense.  
Obviously you can't just drop a license willy nilly.  That would make 
the whole thing rather pointless, no? ;-)

> Why AFL?
> Why MIT or BSD is inappropriate?
> What about CC?
> Was there some discussion about it?
>   

Yes, extensive review by lawyers.  The initial license was chosen based 
on analysis of how good a legal foundation they made for the 
transaction.  The rights that come to the PSF are those in that license 
+ what the contributor agreement grants.

- Stephan