[License-review] Submission of the Upstream Compatibility License v1.0 (UCL-1.0) for approval

[Gervase Markham]

On 25/10/16 18:29, Josh berkus wrote:
> 2. any additions to this core code must be licensed Apache 2.0, and
> documented.

I'm not sure you can force this, because the Apache license itself says
that it's OK to put Apache code into proprietary products. That's the
point of a permissive license. If you say derivatives of this Apache
code have to be Apache-licensed, you've turned it into a copyleft license.

> While hardly ideal, from a *developer* perspective this is a big
> improvement over CLA+Dual, which is the common pattern.  I don't have to
> fill out a CLA (something which blocks contributors from many countries
> and employers).  

Yeah, but it's not the fact that it's called a CLA that's the problem,
it's the effect that it has. Those promoting this license are just
wanting that effect by other means.

Gerv