Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system [LWN.net]

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 21, 2024 4:11 UTC (Sun) by Conan_Kudo (subscriber, #103240)
In reply to: Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system by khim
Parent article: Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

I don't disagree with that statement either. Ideally usage begets contribution, so we shouldn't put people in a situation where they have to sign weird documents when they want to contribute a fix or improvement based on their usage of the tool.

to post comments

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 21, 2024 4:26 UTC (Sun) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (3 responses)

Well, FSF was asking contributors to sign weird documents when they want to contribute a fix or improvement for years. In fact it's worse with FSF: while Google only asks for license and patent grant, FSF demands that you pass over all rights to what you are creating to them!

Sure, they give you a license to use your own code, but still… that's passing all the rights compared to just grant of the license…

Yet, somehow, animosity is reserved specifically just for the Google?

Paint me unimpressed.

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 21, 2024 8:38 UTC (Sun) by josh (subscriber, #17465) [Link] (2 responses)

I think *all* CLAs are a bad idea. Including the FSF's, to be clear. There's no Google-specific animosity here, nor is there animosity at all, just advocacy.

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 21, 2024 15:05 UTC (Sun) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (1 responses)

Could the problem here be a "certificate of authenticity" problem? Like the kernel's "signed-off-by tag" or whatever it's called?

I know I don't understand the kernel's setup, and I gather there's quite a bit of cargo-culting there, so it's quite a hard problem to solve, but it's trying to get a cast iron guarantee that the person contributing a fix actually has the right to contribute it.

I certainly get the impression that certain sub-system maintainers demand certificates (or they won't merge a patch) from people who clearly have no authority to grant them, so ...

The only way to securely fix the problem is to have something like a CLA where a lawyer quizzes you and says "you DO have the right to contribute this patch, don't you?".

Cheers,
Wol

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 21, 2024 21:29 UTC (Sun) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

The kernel's DCO (Developer's Certificate of Origin) is quite different to signing over rights AIUI. But that's as much as I'll speculate on differences, but at least I can contribute the name of the thing :) .