Re: [PATCH v1] dt-bindings: clock: qcom: Relicense to GPL2 + BSD

[Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>]

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 08:37:53PM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 02:44:47PM +0200, Robert Foss wrote:
> > Qualcomm has given permission for all the dt-bindings to be dual
> > licensed. All of the Linaro authored bindings are easy to change, in
> > terms of the permissions & copyrights, so they've been bundled in this
> > commit.
> > 
> > Additionally clean up the syntax of some of the copyright statements.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > 
> > There are more Qcom bindings that should have the license updated
> > to GPL2+BSD, but since they haven't been authored or copyrighted
> > by Linaro, I think I'll have to hunt down the authors individually.
> > 
> >  include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gcc-msm8998.h          | 2 +-
> >  include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.h                | 2 +-
> >  include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h                 | 6 ++++--
> > 
> 
> At least these 3 have contributors outside Qualcomm and Linaro.
> Doesn't this mean you would still need to contact all of them
> and see if they are fine with relicensing their contribution?

Yes. Though I think you could draw the line at some number of lines. 
This is what I use to get # of lines by email:

git blame -e include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.h | sed -e 's/.*<\(.*\)>.*/\1/' | sort | uniq -c | sort -n

> I don't want to make this more complicated than necessary, but it's
> probably better to be careful when it comes to licensing stuff...
> 
> (Although personally I think it feels a bit weird to discuss copyright
>  for a bunch of "numbered names"...)

Indeed.

Rob