Make Project Name actually effect the scope of the Material and Contribution?

[silverhook]

Currently, there is a Project Name (+ website + email) field, but that field could be construed as solely informational, if anything at all, since it occurs before the title of the document and is nowhere referred to in the document itself.

Consequentially, it seems like the FLA (or any other CA.org CLA) could be interpreted to apply to any contribution from “You” to “Us” that is not explicitly marked as “not a contribution”, whatever you write in the Project Name field.

Would it make sense to somehow make the scope clearer to what Material and Contribution apply to …or am I being too pedantic?

[silverhook]

@catharinamaracke and I agree that we should limit it to the Project and use the Project name field in the actual text.

In that case the Project Name could be used to narrow down the project to the detail that would be good enough also for a B2B use case.

[silverhook]

We use the Project Name in the Contribution definition, for it to have a better scope and get rid of ambiguity.