I won't sign Apache/Google-style CLAs either, because there's no way to terminate the agreement for any future contribution.
I won't sign Apache/Google-style CLAs either, because there's no way to terminate the agreement for any future contribution. Once you've signed, you're bound forever that anything you "submit" is a contribution - and basically everything is a contribution - from Google's CLA: For the purposes of this definition, "submitted" means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent to Google or its representatives, including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, Google for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise designated in writing by You as "Not a Contribution." For example, if you so much as talk to a Googler at the airport bar about a project you've signed a CLA for, bam, it's a contribution unless you remember to be explicit about saying "This is not a contribution". On the other hand, if you don't sign, only things that you explicitly mark as a contribution or otherwise suitably license are contributions, and someone who's signed the CLA is free to integrate it without needing to ask you. I don't want some agreement following me around for life, and I don't want to have to disclose to every future employer that "Oh yeah, I've got an agreement with X that unless I remember to say otherwise X gets the rights to use it". I'd sign a CLA that included a clause that said "This agreement may be terminated by either party in writing. Terminating this agreement does not revoke any licenses granted to the project while the agreement was in force."
Posted by epaulson on Apr 6, 2015, 4:09 PM
Tags
Related issues
- The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
- The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
- (My comment is about detached houses).
- The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
- > steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
- Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.7,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Other)
The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
(My comment is about detached houses).
The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
> steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
> our Git monorepo was developing an annoying problem Sentences like this are so common from people using monorepos that I am convinced ...
Why is there no contact form?
I won't sign Apache/Google-style CLAs either, because there's no way to terminate the agreement for any future contribution.
I won't sign Apache/Google-style CLAs either, because there's no way to terminate the agreement for any future contribution. Once you've signed, you're bound forever that anything you "submit" is a contribution - and basically everything is a contribution - from Google's CLA: For the purposes of this definition, "submitted" means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent to Google or its representatives, including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, Google for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise designated in writing by You as "Not a Contribution." For example, if you so much as talk to a Googler at the airport bar about a project you've signed a CLA for, bam, it's a contribution unless you remember to be explicit about saying "This is not a contribution". On the other hand, if you don't sign, only things that you explicitly mark as a contribution or otherwise suitably license are contributions, and someone who's signed the CLA is free to integrate it without needing to ask you. I don't want some agreement following me around for life, and I don't want to have to disclose to every future employer that "Oh yeah, I've got an agreement with X that unless I remember to say otherwise X gets the rights to use it". I'd sign a CLA that included a clause that said "This agreement may be terminated by either party in writing. Terminating this agreement does not revoke any licenses granted to the project while the agreement was in force."
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.