logo

drewdevault.com

[mirror] blog and personal website of Drew DeVault git clone https://hacktivis.me/git/mirror/drewdevault.com.git
commit: f6277ab4b803675854e0339021911b26cf9ae912
parent 3b55b85bd1194891242866ddc8a5366c8a2da284
Author: Drew DeVault <sir@cmpwn.com>
Date:   Sat, 24 Apr 2021 08:32:22 -0400

Fix typo, thanks tech_exorcist

Diffstat:

Mcontent/blog/DCO.gmi2+-
Mcontent/blog/DCO.md2+-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/content/blog/DCO.gmi b/content/blog/DCO.gmi @@ -27,6 +27,6 @@ The specific meaning varies from project to project, but it is usually used to i This neatly answers all concerns of copyright. You license your contribution under the original license (Apache 2.0 in the case of OpenSearch), and attest that you have sufficient ownership over your changes to do so. You retain your copyright and you don’t leave the door open for the maintainers to relicense your work under some other terms in the future. This offers the maintainers the same rights that they extended to the community themselves. -This is the strategy that Amazon choose for OpenSearch, and it’s a good thing they did, because it strongly signals to the community that it will not fall to the same fate that ElasticSearch has. By doing this, they have imposed on themselves a great deal of difficulty to any future attempt to change their copyright obligations. I applaud Amazon for this move, and I’m optimistic about the future of OpenSearch under their stewardship. +This is the strategy that Amazon chose for OpenSearch, and it’s a good thing they did, because it strongly signals to the community that it will not fall to the same fate that ElasticSearch has. By doing this, they have imposed on themselves a great deal of difficulty to any future attempt to change their copyright obligations. I applaud Amazon for this move, and I’m optimistic about the future of OpenSearch under their stewardship. If you have a project of your own that is concerned about the copyright of third-party contributions, then please consider adopting the DCO instead of a CLA. And, as a contributor, if someone asks you to sign a CLA, consider withholding your contribution: a CLA is a promise to the contributors that someday their work will be taken from them and monetized to the exclusive benefit of the project’s lords. This affects my personal contributions, too — for example, I avoid contributing to Golang as a result of their CLA requirement. Your work is important, and the projects you offer it to should respect that. diff --git a/content/blog/DCO.md b/content/blog/DCO.md @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ copyright and you don't leave the door open for the maintainers to relicense your work under some other terms in the future. This offers the maintainers the same rights that they extended to the community themselves. -This is the strategy that Amazon choose for OpenSearch, and it's a good thing +This is the strategy that Amazon chose for OpenSearch, and it's a good thing they did, because it strongly signals to the community that it will not fall to the same fate that ElasticSearch has. By doing this, they have imposed on themselves a great deal of difficulty to any future attempt to change their