From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com (mail-wr1-f68.google.com [209.85.221.68]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.100.1587745507066478550 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 09:25:07 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@nuviainc-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=lu7KDHjm; spf=pass (domain: nuviainc.com, ip: 209.85.221.68, mailfrom: leif@nuviainc.com) Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id d15so9978517wrx.3 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 09:25:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nuviainc-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=eV6Bs9fWiZxkNU/6LdvpcrPF+KFGuWM7UQx2sp5B19g=; b=lu7KDHjmDHGAUJ3QGJU++z3RkaQW4JQAkwcA9ryEIniNct86NnrJ/a7H9Okm9tmxot q6+EunuBNrj/bbyO0K30HbE7p9ohq/95Zb8TxdT/MDP0YwEXJX0pcBcorzsYWdn8jGKB BT/DROJ3uJr247qlE4k/0bR+hjTyk0C1HFu6p49Lg8Jv2AgadTKTWZrUjV3GS14awF/r qtp0owftN837Q6lkXYj32rvsHyoO7zMhduq5U1mG0IoQODGe/cG1dsuNcH5UBH+K0PrS gQhfI7YfqFVLS4u6DlNmDIk+3tZSI+gAvI40yiZKrqSX/vSwyQnQcnMmDzfLfUBNGZ8n X2ow== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=eV6Bs9fWiZxkNU/6LdvpcrPF+KFGuWM7UQx2sp5B19g=; b=jejK82tUB63ZUMOv1bkJiofI9ancffS3E3Xh9qfOZGKbUhPcOM51D7/ohdwDZ53Tdu z5qOg3Vc5k99jh85+0xFHG2U8zJkVKH1MM2zbL3COr+nHUeBhIZ4u5kdVVjiMVlzn65s sg2BtVhXjBMAjKCVb5EwadB7EREjC2FwDhVTCE+54c2vClQbHahDCr862vW3rnDn/0nk SBLlnRR6Q0aFWiIU1nefGBnQdCpp2Lc9S1p+/rF5DVKJTP3DyjB0bocwE+x/cyo4hRZP fgAGqMsYdjRglYrPlz+GV6VHAZaa7X0TEEYbWnZ6abAntvUtNCO+TMLd64+t7HxAcyja l5iw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaGGFH60Jo0PMXNZVBvqJez6FY05DhclPr+0a5/8TXdx/gnEcxR Fc5NK7OGsyqZliDz9mItkYrH5g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypI1UooSFehZ4DkkR1TjgMQ7LT/5ZgZZBlOWiWgA6ezjNOiU7SVy7sDNhcbyedv146QhZHoZdA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f884:: with SMTP id u4mr11779359wrp.171.1587745505595; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 09:25:05 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from vanye ([2001:470:1f09:12f0:b26e:bfff:fea9:f1b8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v10sm9247645wrq.45.2020.04.24.09.25.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 24 Apr 2020 09:25:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:25:02 +0100 From: "Leif Lindholm" To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io, liming.gao@intel.com, "Kinney, Michael D" , "Zhang, Shenglei" , "Feng, Bob C" , Rebecca Cran Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] BaseTools/PatchCheck.py: Add LicenseCheck Message-ID: <20200424162502.GO14075@vanye> References: <20200422065655.75392-1-shenglei.zhang@intel.com> <21694fd0-aa33-0865-2da8-dec2821deb4c@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <21694fd0-aa33-0865-2da8-dec2821deb4c@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 18:13:58 +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 04/22/20 18:01, Liming Gao wrote: > > Mike: > > The checker purpose is to make sure the correct license be used for new added file. If the file has the different license, it should be reviewed carefully. > > > > I remember we still have one open for third party non bsd+patent > > code (the detail can refer to > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/41639). Now, there is no > > non bsd+patent license files to be added in edk2 after edk2 > > switches to bsd+patent license. > > Some files introduced by Rebecca's BhyvePkg patch series come under the > 2-clause BSD License, and not the 2-clause BSD + Patent License. And > Rebecca cannot relicense them because she's not the (sole) copyright holder. I disagree. BSD+Patent is a pure superset of BSD - this was the logic by which the whole EDK2 project was relicensed in the first place. Rebecca can definitely add the explicit patent grant as part of the contribution. The explicit patent grant of course affects only the contributor, and users of the contributed code, not the original source (and the originating project would not be able to take modifications back without accepting the amended license). > Readme.md states: > > 4. It is preferred that contributions are submitted using the same > copyright license as the base project. When that is not possible, > then contributions using the following licenses can be accepted: > * BSD (2-clause): http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause > * BSD (3-clause): http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause > * MIT: http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT > * Python-2.0: http://opensource.org/licenses/Python-2.0 > * Zlib: http://opensource.org/licenses/Zlib > [...] > Contributions using other licenses might be accepted, but further > review will be required. > > This seems to imply that the "normal" 2-clause BSDL does not require > "further review". And I still hold the opinion that I held when I posted the message referenced above - we do not today have any real policy here. Now, as per my comment above, I don't think that applies in this situation, but it is still somethihg we must resolve (i.e. take an active decision about) before we accept any non BSD+Patent content into any of our BSD+Patent trees. / Leif