[Python-Dev] Making it possible to accept contributions without CLA (was: My thinking about the development process)

[Ben Finney]

Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently at gmail.com> writes:

> There's no real way around this, is there? […] the CLA part is pretty
> unavoidable.

The PSF presently madates that any contributor to Python sign
<URL:http://legacy.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/contributor-agreement.pdf>
the “Contributor Agreement”. This is a unilateral grant from the
contributor to the PSF, and is unequal because the PSF does not grant
these same powers to the recipients of Python.

I raise this, not to start another disagreement about whether this is
desirable; I understand that many within the PSF regard it as
an unfortunate barrier to entry, even if it is necessary.

Rather, I'm asking what, specifically, necessitates this situation.

What would need to change, for the PSF to accept contributions to the
Python copyrighted works, without requiring the contributor to do
anything but license the work under Apache 2.0 license?

Is it specific code within the Python code base which somehow creates
this need? How much, and how would the PSF view work to re-implement
that code for contribution under Apache 2.0 license?

Is it some other dependency? What, specifically; and what can be done to
remove that dependency?

My goal is to see the PSF reach a state where the licensing situation is
an equal-footing “inbound = outbound” like most free software projects;
where the PSF can happily receive from a contributor only the exact same
license the PSF grants to any recipient of Python.

For that to happen, we need to know the specific barriers to such a
goal. What are they?

-- 
 \       “A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me |
  `\                                     at kick boxing.” —Emo Philips |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney