Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]> writes:
> No, please don't down this legal rat hole. It would cause bullshit like
> people submitting dual licensed patches to the scheduler or GPL only
> patches to the ath5k or ACPI code.
Precisely. Signed-off-by means the patch author already authorized
the patch to be applied. With the patch merged the conditions still
in the file (project etc) apply and not some obscure email tags.
If someone really wants to change licencing conditions then the
licence conditions in the source code must be changed.
> Instead, add a section to Documentation/SubmittingPatches that clearly
> states that all changes to a file are licensed under the same license
> as the original file. I don't feel legally qualified to write the correct
> wording.
Current Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1
By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:
(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
have the right to submit it under the open source license
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
indicated in the file; or
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
--
Krzysztof Halasa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
