| 1 |
>>>>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2016, Greg KH wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 09:19:36AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>> This is from the last policy draft: |
| 5 |
>> https://dev.gentoo.org/~rich0/copyrightpolicy.xml |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> Why redraft the already-useful DCO that is out there for you to use |
| 8 |
> as-is: |
| 9 |
> http://developercertificate.org/ |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> As you copied the text, be sure to give proper reference to who owns |
| 12 |
> the copyright of that text please, you just can't rename it and |
| 13 |
> claim it as your own :) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
In fact, Rich *does* give credit to Linux: |
| 16 |
"The DCO is based on the |
| 17 |
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/SubmittingPatches |
| 18 |
Linux Kernel DCO" |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Also, I wouldn't completely exclude that we need to change the wording |
| 21 |
at some later point. Therefore, we may indeed consider taking the DCO |
| 22 |
from the Linux source tree which is distributed under the GPL-2, |
| 23 |
instead of the non-free version ("changing it is not allowed") from |
| 24 |
developercertificate.org. Their wording is identical except for the |
| 25 |
preamble. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Ulrich |
Archives