The BSD license (except for the BSD 4-clause) is friendly towards the ALv2 one:
https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b <https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b> I suppose that the worst case is that we keep that contributed code under the BSD license, and make necessary references, like in NOTICE? -Flavio > On 15 Dec 2019, at 22:18, Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> So, could we just remove the original BSD header >>> from Samsung modified files and just keep their Apache license into >>> those file? >> I don’t recommend we do that as they may of made changes or the files may of >> changed since they copied them. They probably also used teh 3rd party header >> not the ASF one. > > No Samsung files could be brought in until they are made to conform to the > NuttX coding standard (Yes, Samsung changed the coding standard too). If > they are reconverted to the NuttX standard, it should be pretty easy to see > any differences. > > I think we are talking about a doomsday scenario here. We need to get > creative only if there is a snag. Let's assume that there will be no snag > (but also be prepared with Plan B). > > Greg > >
