Programming

The CLA can never override the code license. It handles the transition of your code into their code, and what they can do with it. But once it's published as AGPL, you or anyone else can fork it and work with it as AGPL anyway. The CLA can allow them to change the license to something different. But the AGPL published code remains published and usable under AGPL.

I'm usually fine with contributing under CLA. A CLA often make sense. Because the alternative is a hassle and lock-in to current constructs. Which can have its own set of disadvantages.

A FOSS license and CLA combination can offer reasonable good to both parties: You can be sure your contribution is published as FOSS, and they know they can continue to maintain the project with some autonomy and choices. (Choices can be better or worse for others, of course.)

That's all true except for that last paragraph - the rights and conditions they gave you to existing code are irrevocable, so you'll continue to be able to use the last open source version indefinitely, including the feature you made yourself. It's just that they can release new versions and not publish the source code of their additions, even if that new release also includes a feature you made yourself.

(I'm not a lawyer, but still.)

This is perfectly fine to me. The only features that require an account are AI and chat, two features which make perfect sense to have an account for.

I personally don't even use these features. In fact, I have this in my zed settings.

{
    "disable_ai": true,
    "title_bar": {
        "show_sign_in": false
    }
}