A starting proposal for my end would be: --- In order to keep track of who did what, all patches contributed need to include a statement that to the best of the contributor's knowledge they have the right to contribute it under the specified license.
The test for this is as specified in the [Developer's Certificate of Origin (DCO) 1.1](https://developercertificate.org/). The contributor certifies compliance by adding a line saying Signed-off-by: Developer Name <develo...@example.org> where "Developer Name" is the contributor's real name, and the email address is one the developer is reachable through at the time of contributing. --- We could also do what Linux does and include the DCO v1.1 verbatim in the Readme.md instead of using the link. Best Regards, Leif On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 07:09:41PM +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > Leif and Jordan, > > Would you mind putting together a specific proposal > and perhaps some links to other projects that use > the same approach? > > I am happy to update the RFC to V3 to address this > topic if we can close on it quickly. > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Leif Lindholm [mailto:leif.lindh...@linaro.org] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 10:59 AM > > To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > > Cc: Justen, Jordan L <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com>; edk2- > > de...@lists.01.org > > Subject: Re: [edk2] PATCH] Change EDK II to BSD+Patent > > License > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > I see where Jordan is coming from here. > > > > It isn't just about losing the comment in > > Contriutions.txt - there are > > bits in the actual TianoCore Contribution Agreement that > > cover the > > same things as https://developercertificate.org/ (that > > are not > > explicitly called out elsewhere in the existing > > Contributions.txt). > > > > Like Jordan says, we wouldn't be the first project that > > use > > Signed-off-by without specifying exactly what it means, > > but I think > > we're one of the ones that actually care quite a bit. > > > > I could live with us not resolving this at the same time > > as the > > license change, but I would prefer if we did... > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Leif > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 06:25:54PM +0000, Kinney, Michael > > D wrote: > > > Hi Jordan, > > > > > > No proposed changes to the Signed-off-by tags. If you > > have > > > a proposal, please provide an RFC or bring to the > > monthly > > > EDK II community meeting. > > > > > > This series is focused on the license change, the use > > of SPDX > > > identifiers, and removing the Contributed-under tag > > from > > > commit messages. > > > > > > I will update the V2 version of the patch series in to > > make > > > sure the content from Contributions.txt that is not > > part of > > > the TianoCore Contribution Agreement is added to > > Readme.md. > > > > > > The RFC mentioned the need to update documentation. I > > will > > > send that out as a separate Wiki patch series for > > review. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Justen, Jordan L > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 11:04 AM > > > > To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; > > > > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2] PATCH] Change EDK II to > > BSD+Patent > > > > License > > > > > > > > On 2019-03-13 10:54:22, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > > > > > > > > > > 84141eacac edk2: Remove Contributions.txt and > > update > > > > Readme.md > > > > > > > > I guess this removes the requirement for the > > > > 'Contributed-under' tag > > > > in commit messages? > > > > > > > > But, what about Signed-off-by? Is it desirable to > > > > remove that > > > > requirement? > > > > > > > > Relatedly, some open source projects have > > standardized > > > > on tying the > > > > Signed-off-by to this text: > > > > > > > > https://developercertificate.org/ > > > > > > > > So, the contributor doesn't have to agree to give the > > > > project the > > > > contribution under the Contributed-under terms, but > > > > they still > > > > indicate that they believe that the project can use > > the > > > > code under the > > > > project's indicated license. > > > > > > > > There is also other information in Contributions.txt > > > > that appears to > > > > have been deleted, rather than moved. I guess it is > > > > mostly duplicated > > > > on the wiki. That doesn't mean it's not a good idea > > to > > > > duplicate it in > > > > the source tree, or at least provide a web-link. It > > > > seems like the > > > > first place devs might look for such information is > > > > either the readme, > > > > or Contributions.txt. > > > > > > > > Regarding the wiki, I guess it has to be updated > > after > > > > this change is > > > > made. It might be good to add that to the bug so it > > > > can't be closed > > > > until that is fixed. > > > > > > > > How about updating BaseTools/Scripts/PatchCheck.py? > > > > > > > > -Jordan > > > _______________________________________________ > > > edk2-devel mailing list > > > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > > > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
