Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 11:03:57 -0500 From: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org> To: rgrimes@freebsd.org Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r327368 - head/sbin/ccdconfig Message-ID: <13e7d603-dc2f-2f74-90db-d0bf5059fabe@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201712301511.vBUFBTM8076272@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <201712301511.vBUFBTM8076272@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/30/17 10:11, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >> Author: pfg >> Date: Sat Dec 30 00:22:47 2017 >> New Revision: 327368 >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/327368 >> >> Log: >> ccdconfig: Update licensing terms to match NetBSD. >> >> The code originated in NetBSD which has since removed Clauses 3 and 4. >> >> Approved by: phk (concerning his own copyright) >> Obtained from: NetBSD (CVS ccdconfig.c 1.47, ccdconfig.8 1.24) > I am a bit on edge about these "license" changes that are occuring, > before what you had been doing was adding "SPDX" tags which are just > an advisory item, now your actually changing the text of licenses > and doing so without second or third eyes and in a way that for me > is a bit questionable. That is correct. I will be glad to move to "code review" mode from now on. I agree it is important to have more eyes on such changes. It just happens that even copyright owners sometimes don't want to look at these changes. > Part of the problem comes that if you go back and pull a licence change > from NetBSD that was done in 2000 and apply it to our code because it > was dervied from there your ignoring the fact that someone else may > of made changes between 2000 and today, and technically those changes > fall under the licence that was inplace when they made those changes. It is not as simple as that, I did check the changes that are relevant for us in NetBSD before the license changes. I might have missed something though, so yes I agree on having more eyes. > Also the NetBSD license change may of been athorized directly, as in > this case here where you got direct permission from phk, and I have not > seen any notes about that in your prior commits. Also note that if > someone authorized NetBSD to make a license change, that authorization > is NOT global in nature, it is for NetBSD to make that change, not > *BSD. Authorization from NetBSD would be necessary if we were including code from NetBSD that was not meant to be covered by the license change. I didn't find any evidence of that, but feel free to point out any such case so that we can take it to the NetBSD guys. Pedro.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?13e7d603-dc2f-2f74-90db-d0bf5059fabe>