Securing contribution possibilities

[zeuner]

Question

What possibilities do you see for securing contributors' future possibility to contribute to the project they put their work in? What is your stance towards implementing them?

This question is meant to cover broader aspects that mere code licensing, but also platform decisions (e.g. to protect contributors from being locked out in the future due to platform decisions)?

Candidates I'd like to get an answer from

No response

Reminder of the Q&A rules

Please adhere to the Q&A guidelines and rules

[roberth]

Hi @zeuner, I feel like this is a very broad question, or maybe I'm missing some context.

Nixpkgs is generally very accepting of various quirks, whether that's packaging unfree software, supporting niche platforms, etc.
I would not support an overly strict removal policy, in favor of managing expectations with meta attributes.

I don't see any reason to lock out contributors other than moderation; socially unacceptable behavior. If you behave respectfully, I see no reason for trouble.

NixOS/rfcs#180 does introduce a policy for unmaintained packages and broken packages; conditions which are avoidable, so I don't think this would be a problem either.

[proofconstruction]

I think that to some extent these issues would be addressed by moving to an org-hosted git forge, but I don't feel confident that I fully understand the question. Can you add more details?