On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 12:23:18 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 10:50:27AM +0100, Leif Lindholm wrote: > > Apologies for late feedback. > > > > I'm super happy with this set, but... > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:20:14 +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > > Copy over unmodified (except for running through uncrustify), from > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-libc/tree/master/StdLib/LibC/CRT > > > > ...I think these files should also be given the SPDX treatment, and > > while doing that have the explicit patent grant added by changing them > > from BSD2 to BSD+Patent. > > See patch #6 ;)
Right. But bringing it in under a license that does not include the explicit patent grant creates uncertainty about how terrified large slow-moving companies need to be to fine comb every individual commit at every import/export stage. > (comments on the process are welcome too, not sure I can just change the > licence without intel explicitly acking this ...). Swapping an explicit license to an SPDX tag describing the same license should not be controversial. And neither should *adding* a patent grant to that license. (The Intel copyright statements should obviously be retained.) If you feel we need to get an explicit nod from someone at Intel ... that would be easier when Kinney wasn't on sabbatical :) But should be possible to get? Any takers from Intel? Best Regards, Leif -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#89534): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/89534 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/90772975/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
