Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@g.o>
Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-core] Re: Poll: Would you sign a Contributer License Agreement?
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:37:27
1 >>>>> On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, Greg KH wrote:
3 > And I'm dragging this back to -core, as I'm not on -project, so my
4 > responses are not even going there, and you started this on -core.
6 Nope, I started the thread on -project on 2018-05-30:
8 I cross-posted to -core once (on 2018-06-04) for wider audience,
9 because I had received only a handful of replies by then.
11 Otherwise, there is no reason why this discussion should take place in
12 private, so it is off-topic in -core.
14 >> With the license currently listed at
15 >> ("changing is not allowed") nobody would even be allowed to commit
16 >> the DCO to a repository under it's own terms. Catch-22.
18 > And as the Debian developers said, "that's crazy-talk, don't worry
19 > about it." Seriously, don't.
21 If anyone worries about non-free files in their repositories, then
22 it's Debian. Certainly much more than we do.
24 Also, encouraging people to falsely certify things (and "don't worry
25 about it") is exactly what we want to avoid. If there is a S-o-b line
26 included with a commit, then there must not be any doubt that this
27 commit conforms to the wording of the certificate. If we allow people
28 to commit non-free files and certify them under the Linux DCO 1.1 then
29 the whole exercise is useless.
31 > And if you do have a lawyer who is worried about such a thing,
32 > please let me talk to them and I'll be glad to put them in contact
33 > with loads of other lawyers who will be glad to discuss it.
35 > What company or legal entity has concern with the DCO as-written?
37 Everybody who wants to commit a license file to the Gentoo repository,
38 and with the DCO 1.1 would have to lie about its status?
40 > That's not the only thing that you have changed here, as you state.
41 > You changed the wording of the types of licenses (hint, "free
42 > software" is not the same as "open source" and has consequences by
43 > changing that wording.)
45 It is generally acknowledged that "open source" licenses and "free
46 software licenses" are mostly congruent. (There are very few OSI
47 approved licenses like Artistic 1.0 which the FSF classifies as
48 non-free. The other way around, I am not aware of any.)
50 Nevertheless, I don't have a strong opinion here. Our Social Contract
51 says "free software", so we changed it to that for consistency, but
52 replacement of the term alone wouldn't be a sufficient reason to
53 create a modified version.
55 >> Do you think that anybody would have difficulties understanding
56 >> this? Then please propose a better wording.
58 > I am saying, over and over and over, that it's not up to me to
59 > change the wording. I want _you_ to justify the change by getting a
60 > solid legal opinion that what you are changing actually does what
61 > you think it does, and is even needed in the first place.
63 > Again, don't try to arm-chair legal issues. That ends up causing
64 > many more problems than you can ever imagine. There's a good reason
65 > that lawyers write licenses and legal texts as they understand
66 > things that are not obvious to non-legally-trained people.
68 (Sometimes I wonder how some people survive. Do they ask their lawyers
69 before passing a green traffic light? Or before agreeing to a contract
70 of sale in the grocery store? :-)
72 > And again, you are ignoring the fact that we all are now going to
73 > have to get the legal departments of our companies to evaluate this.
74 > That will NOT take just 1 minute. If you use the DCO as-is, that
75 > would only take 1 minute.
77 How about the following change then:
79 --- a/glep-0076.rst
80 +++ b/glep-0076.rst
81 @@ -133,12 +133,17 @@ with the project's license.
82 For commits made using a VCS, the committer shall certify agreement
83 to the Gentoo DCO by adding ``Signed-off-by: Name <e-mail>`` to the
84 commit message as a separate line. Committers must use their real
85 name, i.e., the name that would appear in an official document like
86 a passport.
88 +As an alternative to the above, commits may be certified with the
89 +Linux Kernel DCO 1.1. Committers shall clearly indicate this by
90 +adding ``(Linux DCO 1.1)`` at the end of the ``Signed-off-by`` line.
91 +Using the Gentoo DCO is strongly preferred, though.
92 +
93 The following is the current Gentoo DCO::
95 Gentoo Developer's Certificate of Origin, revision 1
97 By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:
100 It would allow anyone who has issues with our modified version to
101 commit under the original Linux DCO instead. Of course, certain files
102 they couldn't commit then.
104 Ulrich