On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 01:15:55PM +0000, Pankaj Bansal wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tom Rini [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 6:34 PM
> > To: Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Varun Sethi
> > <[email protected]>; Leo Li <[email protected]>; Priyanka Jain
> > <[email protected]>; Mingkai Hu <[email protected]>; York Sun
> > <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: Freescale: re-license device tree files 
> > under
> > GPLv2+/X11
> > 
> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 09:43:33AM +0530, Pankaj Bansal wrote:
> > > The current GPL only licensing on the device trees makes it very
> > > impractical for other software components licensed under another
> > > license.
> > >
> > > To make it easier to reuse them, re-license the the device trees for
> > > Freescale (now NXP) SoCs and boards under GPLv2+/X11 dual license.
> > >
> > > Same trend is followed in linux.
> > >
> > > Cc: Priyanka Jain <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Mingkai Hu <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: York Sun <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Notes:
> > >     V2:
> > >     - Change license from X11 only to GPL2.0+/X11 dual license.
> > >     - Updated the commit message accordingly.
> > 
> > OK.  But what does the kernel have for these exact files?  
> 
> The exact same files in linux kernel are GPLv2 and X11 dual licensed. Here is 
> an excerpt from fsl-ls1043a.dtsi
>  * This file is dual-licensed: you can use it either under the terms
>  * of the GPLv2 or the X11 license, at your option. Note that this dual
>  * licensing only applies to this file, and not this project as a
>  * whole.
>  *

OK, good.

> > If it's GPL2.0+/X11 dual, then this is just a normal sync with Linux Kernel 
> > v4.xx and
> > you should say that in the commit message. 
> 
> I mentioned in commit message "Same trend is followed in linux."
> 
> > If you haven't gotten these merged to a Linux Kernel release, are they in 
> > -next there?
> 
> These changes are already in linux.

OK, good.  But there's
http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/U-Boot/Patches#Attributing_Code_Copyrights_Sign
and you need to say what kernel you're syncing this file against (since
there shouldn't be anything U-Boot specific in any of these files) so
it's clear for the next person to come along and sync them.  Thanks!

-- 
Tom

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to