On Mon, 27 Apr 2015, Dave Taht wrote:
I don't really understand what this is intended to clarify.
Are you asking contributors to specifically relicense their code as GPL
as a criterion for inclusion? That does make for headaches with
alternatively licensed code under lighter licenses with many
contributors.
Or are you merely requiring that the license of included code be
compatible with the GPL (as the BSD, apache, and many other OSI approved
licenses are.)
Ah, if it's not clear, it needs to be clarified. See below for some little
additions (against the 2nd of the 2nd round of split patches).
My intention in drafting that was two-fold:
1. To allow for (exclusively) permissively licensed files to exist in the
Quagga code-base, and contributions to such files to still be available
under that permissive licence.
At present, it isn't clear (to me) when a contribution is made to an file
with only a permissive licence notification in Quagga, whether that
contribution is under the GPLv2 that Quagga generally is under, or whether
it is under the terms of the licence notification in that file, or both.
Generally, I'd guess most people would think the licence notification of
the file itself would take precedence, though maybe it's both, or only the
GPL. It isn't clear.
So my suggestion was intended to clarify that and make it clear that when
contributors modify stuff, their modifications are made available under
the terms of both any licence of the file and, independently, the GPLv2 of
Quagga generally. At least, unless explicitly indicated otherwise (which
isn't in the text!).
The compatibility issue is actually somewhat orthogonal to this case. It
is even possible that we'd have files with GPL-incompatible licences (e.g.
part of the docs are GFDL I think), with this clarification we could be
sure we'd also have GPL licences on any further modifications.
2. To ensure that contributors are aware that contributions to Quagga may
end up being distributed as GPLv2, at any level.
E.g., non-GPL-but-compatible files could be compiled together with other
GPL bits and the result is of course distributed under the GPL. Or it
could be that some of the contributed source files are sufficiently
dependent on other GPL parts of Quagga that (at least some) maintainers
feel that file must be distributed under the GPL[1].
Really, this bit is more about making contributors aware of the social
norms of Quagga:
It is a GPL project, like the subject says. You should expect your
contributions will be distributed under the GPL.
to avoid confusion and upset.
Does the below work a bit better?
1. In which case we've been happy to try arrange things so the original
contributor still gets contributions to Quagga made available under
their preferred licence. Further I at least would usually be happy to
restructure the code so there's a clear delineation between the
non-GPL-dependent and Quagga-dependent code, so the former class can be
licensed under the contributor's desired non-GPL-but-compatible licence
- if they wish.
commit 2d7b19738e1d878b8adbb85a593d3635ad76ab6b
Author: Paul Jakma <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Apr 27 17:40:55 2015 +0100
HACKING: Quagga is a GPL project, all contributions must be compatible with
GPL
* HACKING.tex: Quagga is a GPL project, as the top-level COPYING file has
clearly stated, since inception. All contributions must be under terms
that are compatible with the GPL. This is obvious, but good to be
explicit about in the "REQUIRED READING" section.
diff --git a/HACKING.tex b/HACKING.tex
index f78d451..56f36c6 100644
--- a/HACKING.tex
+++ b/HACKING.tex
@@ -21,19 +21,28 @@ are welcome.
\section{REQUIRED READING}
\label{sec:required}
-Note well: By proposing a change to Quagga, by whatever means, you are
implicitly agreeing:
+Note well: Quagga generally is a GPL project. By proposing a change to
+Quagga, by whatever means, you are implicitly agreeing:
\begin{itemize}
- \item To licence your contribution according to the licence of any files in
Quagga being
- modified.
+
+ \item To licence your contribution according to the licence notification
+ of any files in Quagga being modified, \textit{and} according to the
+ COPYING file in the top-level directory of Quagga, other than where
+ the contribution explicitly and clearly indicates otherwise; and in
+ all cases under terms that do not conflict with the COPYING file in
+ the top-level directory.
- \item That it is your responsibility to ensure you hold whatever rights are required to be
- able to contribute this change under the licenses of the files in Quagga being
- modified.
+ \item That it is your responsibility to ensure you hold whatever rights
+ are required to be able to contribute this change under the licenses
+ of the files in Quagga being modified, and the top-level COPYING
+ file.
- \item That it is your responsibility to give with the contribution a full
account of all
- interests held and claims in the contribution; such as through
copyright, trademark and
- patent laws or otherwise; that are known to you or your associates
(e.g. your employer).
+ \item That it is your responsibility to give with the contribution a full
+ account of all interests held and claims in the contribution; such
+ as through copyright, trademark and patent laws or otherwise; that
+ are known to you or your associates (e.g. your employer).
+
\end{itemize}
Before contributing to Quagga, you \textbf{must} also read
Section~\ref{sec:commit-messages}.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma [email protected] @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Personifiers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but Mr. Dignity!
-- Bernadette Bosky
_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
