Re: BK MetaData License Problem?

[Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>]

Russel King wrote:
 >
 > Therefore, I'd stronlg advise people in the EU not to use BK's
 > BK_USER/BK_HOST feature when importing patches.
 >
I think the user info is not critical: according to the GPL, you must 
tag your changes with date+name. By making a patch, you have agreed to 
the GPL terms, which means you have agreed that your name will be used 
together with the change.
I think the copyright laws require that, too.

But the GPL doesn't mandate a changelog...


Marek Habersack wrote:
> 
> Perhaps I am being silly at the moment, but wouldn't it suffice in this case
> to put a statement in your commit message (I believe it can be automated)
> stating that this message and the comitted data are licensed under the GPL?
 >

For example.
Or a sentence in the Licensing file, or whatever.("If you want to 
contribute to the development at www.kernel.org, then you must agree to 
the following conditions: You name will be used, your commit text will 
be used, your mail address will be published etc." No GPL conflict, you
are free to fork)

I agree with Ingo that there is the danger that without anything, it 
might happen that we'd have to throw away the changelogs [or that 
express permission for all existing entries will be needed, which is 
more or less equivalent]

--
	Manfred