Hi Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Rini [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 6:54 PM > To: Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Varun Sethi > <[email protected]>; Leo Li <[email protected]>; Priyanka Jain > <[email protected]>; Mingkai Hu <[email protected]>; York Sun > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: Freescale: re-license device tree files > under > GPLv2+/X11 > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 01:15:55PM +0000, Pankaj Bansal wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Tom Rini [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 6:34 PM > > > To: Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]> > > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Varun Sethi > > > <[email protected]>; Leo Li <[email protected]>; Priyanka Jain > > > <[email protected]>; Mingkai Hu <[email protected]>; York Sun > > > <[email protected]> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: Freescale: re-license device tree > > > files under > > > GPLv2+/X11 > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 09:43:33AM +0530, Pankaj Bansal wrote: > > > > The current GPL only licensing on the device trees makes it very > > > > impractical for other software components licensed under another > > > > license. > > > > > > > > To make it easier to reuse them, re-license the the device trees > > > > for Freescale (now NXP) SoCs and boards under GPLv2+/X11 dual > license. > > > > > > > > Same trend is followed in linux. > > > > > > > > Cc: Priyanka Jain <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: Mingkai Hu <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: York Sun <[email protected]> > > > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Bansal <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Notes: > > > > V2: > > > > - Change license from X11 only to GPL2.0+/X11 dual license. > > > > - Updated the commit message accordingly. > > > > > > OK. But what does the kernel have for these exact files? > > > > The exact same files in linux kernel are GPLv2 and X11 dual licensed. > > Here is an excerpt from fsl-ls1043a.dtsi > > * This file is dual-licensed: you can use it either under the terms > > * of the GPLv2 or the X11 license, at your option. Note that this > > dual > > * licensing only applies to this file, and not this project as a > > * whole. > > * > > OK, good. > > > > If it's GPL2.0+/X11 dual, then this is just a normal sync with Linux > > > Kernel v4.xx and you should say that in the commit message. > > > > I mentioned in commit message "Same trend is followed in linux." > > > > > If you haven't gotten these merged to a Linux Kernel release, are they in > > > - > next there? > > > > These changes are already in linux. > > OK, good. But there's > http://www.denx.de/wiki/view/U- > Boot/Patches#Attributing_Code_Copyrights_Sign > and you need to say what kernel you're syncing this file against (since there > shouldn't be anything U-Boot specific in any of these files) so it's clear > for the > next person to come along and sync them. Thanks! >
I am not syncing the files from linux to u-boot. I am just changing the license similar to commit 13b2ba1a11. There is no functional change in the commit. > -- > Tom _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
