I don't understand the argument you're making. Any group of people is free to decline to associate with an individual for any reason at all (outside various explicitly protected cases). Freedom of association is the entirety of the legal framework required for this. A development community that exists of me and one other individual who contributes patches can be held to the conditions of a code of conduct I've chosen - if I feel that the other contributor has breached that, I'm free to block them from any project-related resources even if doing so causes them professional harm.
Moreover, I am pretty sure that you will find that any "participation" in Ubuntu whose magnitude exceeds occasional drive-by patches delivered by amateurs which could be coerced to sign the CLA is governed by an ad hoc contract undersigned by at least two legal persons.
Nope.
You have been vocal about Ubuntu's CLA in the past. Participation in Ubuntu is contingent on entering into a legal contract with Canonical; this is not by chance.
There are plenty of ways to participate in Ubuntu without agreeing to the CLA.
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: "Discipline"? "Members"? What kind of "community" are you talking about?
Date: 2017-12-22 08:24 am (UTC)Nope.
There are plenty of ways to participate in Ubuntu without agreeing to the CLA.