All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Jon Loeliger <jdl@jdl.com>
Cc: "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: Outstanding DTC patches?
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 13:43:24 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080104024324.GA4326@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1JAQqT-00056B-FP@jdl.com>

On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 08:14:53AM -0600, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> So, like, the other day David Gibson mumbled:
> > 
> > I posted this one a while back, but I guess it dropped through the
> > cracks.
> 
> Yep, sorry.
> 
> > There's also the patch I sent you quite a long time ago that
> > adds a clarifying readme about the licensing situation - that might be
> > an idea for v1.1, too.
> 
> I can not find this; neither locally nor on patchworks.
> Do you have a Subject: line, a URL, or could you
> please repost it?

Ah, I think I sent it by private mail, so it won't be in patchwork.
Here you are:

dtc/libfdt: Add README clarifying licensing

The fact the dtc are distributed together, but have different licenses
can be a bit confusing.  Several people have enquired as to what the
deal is with the libfdt licensing, so this patch adds a README
clarifying the situation with a rationale.

Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>

Index: dtc/README.license
===================================================================
--- /dev/null	1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000
+++ dtc/README.license	2007-11-02 11:43:19.000000000 +1100
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+Licensing and contribution policy of dtc and libfdt
+===================================================
+
+This dtc package contains two pieces of software: dtc itself, and
+libfdt which comprises the files in the libfdt/ subdirectory.  These
+two pieces of software, although closely related, are quite distinct.
+dtc does not incoporate or rely on libfdt for its operation, nor vice
+versa.  It is important that these two pieces of software have
+different license conditions.
+
+As the copyright banners in each source file attest, dtc is licensed
+under the GNU GPL.  The full text of the GPL can be found in the file
+entitled 'GPL' which should be included in this package.  dtc code,
+therefore, may not be incorporated into works which do not have a GPL
+compatible license.
+
+libfdt, however, is GPL/BSD dual-licensed.  That is, it may be used
+either under the terms of the GPL, or under the terms of the 2-clause
+BSD license (aka the ISC license).  The full terms of that license are
+given in the copyright banners of each of the libfdt source files.
+This is, in practice, equivalent to being BSD licensed, since the
+terms of the BSD license are strictly more permissive than the GPL.
+
+I made the decision to license libfdt in this way because I want to
+encourage widespread and correct usage of flattened device trees,
+including by proprietary or otherwise GPL-incompatible firmware or
+tools.  Allowing libfdt to be used under the terms of the BSD license
+makes that it easier for vendors or authors of such software to do so.
+
+This does mean that libfdt code could be "stolen" - say, included in a
+proprietary fimware and extended without contributing those extensions
+back to the libfdt mainline.  While I hope that doesn't happen, I
+believe the goal of allowing libfdt to be widely used is more
+important than avoiding that.  libfdt is quite small, and hardly
+rocket science; so the incentive for such impolite behaviour is small,
+and the inconvenience caused therby is not dire.
+
+Licenses such as the LGPL which would allow code to be used in non-GPL
+software, but also require contributions to be returned were
+considered.  However, libfdt is designed to be used in firmwares and
+other environments with unusual technical constraints.  It's difficult
+to anticipate all possible changes which might be needed to meld
+libfdt into such environments and so difficult to suitably word a
+license that puts the boundary between what is and isn't permitted in
+the intended place.  Again, I judged encouraging widespread use of
+libfdt by keeping the license terms simple and familiar to be the more
+important goal.
+
+**IMPORTANT** It's intended that all of libfdt as released remain
+permissively licensed this way.  Therefore only contributions which
+are released under these terms can be merged into the libfdt mainline.
+
+
+David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
+(principal original author of dtc and libfdt)
+2 November 2007


-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

  reply	other threads:[~2008-01-04  2:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-01-02 18:21 Outstanding DTC patches? Jon Loeliger
2008-01-03  4:48 ` David Gibson
2008-01-03 14:14   ` Jon Loeliger
2008-01-04  2:43     ` David Gibson [this message]
2008-01-04 14:38       ` Jon Loeliger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080104024324.GA4326@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
    --cc=jdl@jdl.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.