Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 13:35:16 -0700 From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko <gonzo@freebsd.org> To: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r361796 - head/sys/dts/arm64/overlays Message-ID: <20200604203516.GA5827@bluezbox.com> In-Reply-To: <202006041720.054HKx9T045530@repo.freebsd.org> References: <202006041720.054HKx9T045530@repo.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Oleksandr Tymoshenko (gonzo@FreeBSD.org) wrote: > Author: gonzo > Date: Thu Jun 4 17:20:58 2020 > New Revision: 361796 > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/361796 > > Log: > Remove licenses > > I haven't requested explicit permission from authors and shouldn't have > added BSDL headers without it. > > Requestes by: imp Some comments on this commit. Adding license texts was a knee-jerk reaction to the request to get over with a minor change. Not asking actual contributors for permissions was the wrong thing to do, so I reverted it. I agree with Warner's view that dts files are not subject to copyright because they're statements of facts. I also checked other files in sys/dts/{arm,arm64}/overlays/ - none of them has a license header, so my original commit was consistent with the standards of that particular part of the codebase and didn't introduce any legal exposure (hypothetical or not) FreeBSD didn't have at the time of the commit. Summing up everything above: I think r361796 brings files to the form they should be in. If the eventual consensus in the Project is that dtso files require licenses and copyright statements there need to be a wider effort organized to get permissions from the respective contributors. -- gonzo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200604203516.GA5827>