From: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 2/2] docs/manual: add section about patch licensing
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:08:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56D0CCD2.7040201@lucaceresoli.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160225201602.GC5870@free.fr>
Dear Yann,
On 25/02/2016 21:16, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> Luca, All,
>
> On 2016-02-25 12:51 +0100, Luca Ceresoli spake thusly:
>> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
>> Cc: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
>> Cc: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be>
>> Cc: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
>> Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
>> Cc: Steve Calfee <stevecalfee@gmail.com>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Note: although there are only wording improvements since v2, I did not
>> carry the Acked-by from Thomas and Arnout because the topic is
>> delicate and Yann explicitly nacked the patch.
>
> IIRC, I NAKed it because, in case of proprietary packages, the patches
> can only be available under the FLOSS license of the package they are
> applied to.
Yup. I hurried to resend the previous patch (affecting COPYING) and
didn't quite address your comments on this one. Sorry about that, I did
it just now.
>
> [--SNIP--]
>> +==== Patches to packages
>> +
>> +Buildroot is bundled with a set of patches that are applied to
>> +packages to fix cross-compilation or other issues. See
>> +xref:patch-policy[] for the technical details.
>> +
>> +These patches are effectively a derived work of the package they are
>> +applied to, and so they are released under the same license as the
>> +software they apply to. They are not distributed under the Buildroot
>> +license.
>
> Why not repeat the same sentence as the one from the previous patch?
Because this is the manual, and I wanted it to be less legalese and more
humanese/hackerese... and I felt like explaining the reason ("patches
are effectively a derived work...").
But your suggestion is quite good, and it definitely ensures the manual
doesn't contradict COPYING! :) And actually they mostly state the same
things, only in a different order and with different wording.
Unless others suggest differently, I'll take your suggestion for v4.
--
Luca
--
Luca
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-26 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-25 11:51 [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 0/2] Patch file clarification & Co Luca Ceresoli
2016-02-25 11:51 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 1/2] COPYING: add exception about patch licensing Luca Ceresoli
2016-02-25 12:40 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2016-02-25 19:42 ` Yann E. MORIN
2016-02-26 18:51 ` Peter Korsgaard
2016-02-25 11:51 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v3 2/2] docs/manual: add section " Luca Ceresoli
2016-02-25 20:16 ` Yann E. MORIN
2016-02-26 22:08 ` Luca Ceresoli [this message]
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=56D0CCD2.7040201@lucaceresoli.net \
--to=luca@lucaceresoli.net \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/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.