Re: [PATCH v1 RFC 1/7] Replace license with GPL

2017-10-14 Thread Andrew Lunn 
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 09:18:16AM +, David Laight wrote:
> From: tristram...@microchip.com
> > Sent: 06 October 2017 21:33
> > Replace license with GPL.
> 
> Don't you need permission from all the people who have updated
> the files in order to make this change?

Hi David

Interesting question.

ksz_9477_reg.h and ksz_spi.c are not a problem, since Woojung Huh is
the only contributor.

ksz_common.c has a MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") so indicating it probably was
intended to the GPL.

However, getting an acked-by from Arkadi Sharshevsky
 would be good.

   Andrew

RE: [PATCH v1 RFC 1/7] Replace license with GPL

2017-10-09 Thread Woojung.Huh 
> Subject: [PATCH v1 RFC 1/7] Replace license with GPL
> 
> From: Tristram Ha 
> 
> Replace license with GPL.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tristram Ha 

Reviewed-by: Woojung Huh

Re: [PATCH v1 RFC 1/7] Replace license with GPL

2017-10-09 Thread Pavel Machek 
On Fri 2017-10-06 13:32:59, tristram...@microchip.com wrote:
> From: Tristram Ha 
> 
> Replace license with GPL.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tristram Ha 

Acked-by: Pavel Machek 


-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [PATCH v1 RFC 1/7] Replace license with GPL

2017-10-09 Thread Florian Fainelli 
On 10/09/2017 11:40 AM, tristram...@microchip.com wrote:
>> From: tristram...@microchip.com
>>> Sent: 06 October 2017 21:33
>>> Replace license with GPL.
>>
>> Don't you need permission from all the people who have updated
>> the files in order to make this change?
>>
>>  David
> 
> I am a little confused by your comment.  The 4 original KSZ9477 DSA
> driver files were written by Woojung at Microchip Technology Inc.
> There was a complaint the "AS IS" license is not exactly GPL.
> 
> It should be submitted formally to net-next instead of a RFC, but it
> is probably pointless to do that when there is no code change.
> 
> I am hoping these drastic changes of KSZ9477 driver can be accepted
> so that the patches can be submitted formally to net-next.

What David is saying is that you need to take into account every one who
has been making changes to the Microchip driver, because anytime
someones submits a patch that gets accepted, their "voice" now counts:

Fortunately, the list seems to be fairly limited:

git shortlog -sne drivers/net/dsa/microchip
 5  Arkadi Sharshevsky 
 1  Woojung Huh 

So seeking contributor approval for a license change should be fairly
simple.
-- 
Florian

RE: [PATCH v1 RFC 1/7] Replace license with GPL

2017-10-09 Thread Tristram.Ha 
> From: tristram...@microchip.com
> > Sent: 06 October 2017 21:33
> > Replace license with GPL.
> 
> Don't you need permission from all the people who have updated
> the files in order to make this change?
> 
>   David

I am a little confused by your comment.  The 4 original KSZ9477 DSA
driver files were written by Woojung at Microchip Technology Inc.
There was a complaint the "AS IS" license is not exactly GPL.

It should be submitted formally to net-next instead of a RFC, but it
is probably pointless to do that when there is no code change.

I am hoping these drastic changes of KSZ9477 driver can be accepted
so that the patches can be submitted formally to net-next.

RE: [PATCH v1 RFC 1/7] Replace license with GPL

2017-10-09 Thread David Laight 
From: tristram...@microchip.com
> Sent: 06 October 2017 21:33
> Replace license with GPL.

Don't you need permission from all the people who have updated
the files in order to make this change?

David