From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Osipenko Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] pinctrl: tegra: add suspend/resume support Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 04:13:48 +0400 Message-ID: <513538BC.5070706@gmail.com> References: <5097F013.8070002@wwwdotorg.org> <1352165844-4837-1-git-send-email-digetx@gmail.com> <50988701.5080602@wwwdotorg.org> <50990BE0.9040507@gmail.com> <50994AFB.8000802@wwwdotorg.org> <50996DCC.8030508@gmail.com> <509984F9.1060508@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <509984F9.1060508-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org 07.11.2012 01:45, Stephen Warren =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: > On 11/06/2012 01:06 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> 06.11.2012 21:38, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> OK, so only you and he have the binaries built from this repository= ? Or, >>> are those binaries distributed to other people too? If the binaries= are >>> distributed, you need to distribute (or offer to make available) th= e >>> source too. See the GPL for exact requirements. >> >> I'm not against GPL, but for now repo is private. It's something lik= e nvidia's >> private downstream kernel that I'm working on. Surely it will become= public but >> bit later. >> >>> OK, so if I accept the private repo link, download the source, and >>> repost it on my github account, you're fine with that? If not, then >>> you're requesting something semantically equivalent to an NDA. >> >> For me it's not very important, but my companion may be unhappy with= that. I >> just believe that you are not so evil. As I understand NDA should be= some >> legally valid official document. I'm sure you are much better in thi= s than me, >> so let's stop discussing it. >> >>> However, I'd ask that we resolve the distribution issues of the sou= rce >>> kernel first to avoid any tainting of the patch. >> >> I don't see any issues. It's my personal work that I'm contributing = to the >> kernel community. If nvidia is against of any public contributions j= ust tell me. >=20 > NVIDIA and indeed the kernel community welcome public contributions. >=20 > However, the rules in SubmittingPatches (as set by the kernel communi= ty, > not NVIDIA) are clear re: the licensing requirements for patches. If > you're taking the patches from a downstream kernel that's published a= s > binaries and not source, I believe that makes the patches non-complia= nt > (since there's a GPL violation in the downstream kernel, so the patch= es > can't be passed off as being GPL compliant), and hence your > signed-off-by line is not valid. >=20 > Once the downstream kernel's source is publicly available, I imagine > there will be no problem accepting patches that are derived from it. >=20 Hello, Stephen. I made my recent work on kernel public and it's availab= le at https://bitbucket.org/digetx/picasso-kernel/ It contains all patches= that I have sent and has some small fixes that I will send later. Hope there= is no problem anymore and you would like to continue reviewing my patches.