On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 01:07:28PM +0200, Engel Nyst wrote:
Comparing the current provision[1] in copyleft-next, with DCO a) and
b), it seems that what is "missing", is an explicit acceptance, and
default licensing, of the corresponding open/free licenses for the
modified files instead of copyleft-next only.
I am seeing significant value in the DCO (in a relatively
unadulterated form) being popularized as an alternative to maximalist
CLAs. I think it may be best for the DCO to live on its own and indeed
become more visible as a distinct legal document; thus I now if
anything see more value in not bothering to try to incorporate a
DCO-like provision in copyleft-next.
- RF