Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@g.o>
Cc: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>, gentoo-project <gentoo-project@l.g.o>
Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-core] Re: Poll: Would you sign a Contributer License Agreement?
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:08:42
1 On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 7:05 AM Greg KH <gregkh@g.o> wrote:
2 >
3 > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 09:54:19AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
4 > >
5 > > The problems are listed in the rationale of GLEP 76.
6 > >
7 > > With the license currently listed at
8 > > ("changing is not allowed") nobody would even be allowed to commit the
9 > > DCO to a repository under it's own terms. Catch-22.
10 >
11 > And as the Debian developers said, "that's crazy-talk, don't worry about
12 > it." Seriously, don't.
14 Do you have some kind of link to this?
16 Distributing the licenses is completely legal, but I don't see how
17 anybody could make the certifications in the DCO when doing so.
19 >
20 > What company or legal entity has concern with the DCO as-written?
21 >
23 Well, I do, at least as far as license commits go. How could I make
24 the certifications in your DCO when committing a license file like the
25 GPL?
27 The text of the upstream DCO says that the file is "covered under an
28 appropriate open source license," and the GPL isn't covered under an
29 open source license.
31 Don't get me wrong, per the terms in the GPL it is completely legal to
32 redistribute. My problem isn't with redistributing the GPL. My
33 problem is with signing off on the DCO when committing the GPL to a
34 repository, because I'd be making a statement that isn't true.
36 An alternative to this would be to not require a DCO signoff when
37 committing license files.
39 > That's not the only thing that you have changed here, as you state. You
40 > changed the wording of the types of licenses (hint, "free software" is
41 > not the same as "open source" and has consequences by changing that
42 > wording.)
44 Sure, but our intent is to require the use of a free software license.
45 So, the consequences are intentional here. It isn't adequate to
46 merely certify that the work is covered by an open source license
47 (this would be one of those cases where the needs of the Linux
48 Foundation may not be the same as the needs of everybody).
50 The other wording change is in changing how the outline numbering
51 works, to separate the three OR clauses from the one AND clause.
53 --
54 Rich