search

EcmaTC53 / docs

Guides and API docs for the ECMA-419 specification, a.k.s JS on embedded systems.
http://embedded.js.org/
Other
0 stars 0 forks source link

We may want to move this out of the ECMA org #1

Closed dtex closed 10 months ago

dtex commented 11 months ago

If our goal is to build a community site, we may need to disassociate it from ECMA. I'm not sure if the requirements for participation in ECMA standards would extend to something like this, but if they do, it would be a hurdle for contributors. What do you think @patrickluthi ?

phoddie commented 11 months ago

I'm OK either way, but I do have a preference for keeping it under Ecma as long as it doesn't create a significant hurdle.

The reason I think that's OK is the model of test262. The test262 repository is under the TC39 GitHub account which is Ecma, just like our repository. Anyone can make PRs to that. They require a CLA for contributions from non-members, which is something anyone else hosting this should do to avoid horrible IP issues down-the-road.

FWIW – MDN makes the licensing of contributions implicit which isn't something I'm entirely comfortable with.

HipsterBrown commented 11 months ago

I also prefer to keep it under the ECMA TC53 org. I have not added a LICENSE file to this, so I will do that along with creating a CLA prompt for contributors similar to test262. I agree that explicit licensing is preferred in this case.

I'm assuming we want to use the same license as test262 for this repo.

phoddie commented 11 months ago

I'm assuming we want to use the same license as test262 for this repo

That would be the most straightforward. BSD should be fine here. And getting another license approved for use by Ecma would likely take some time.

dtex commented 11 months ago

I'm fine with closing this as I do not have strong feelings about the CLA.

phoddie commented 10 months ago

Closing.