All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Christopher Covington <cov@codeaurora.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Courtney Cavin <courtney.cavin@sonymobile.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] ARM: Add Krait L2 register accessor functions
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 17:19:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140408171929.68f328a9@alan.etchedpixels.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140408151056.GH30077@pd.tnic>

On Tue, 8 Apr 2014 17:10:56 +0200
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:25:01AM -0400, Christopher Covington wrote:
> > As I understand it, the license authors. They find it important to maintain
> > clarity even when files get copied into other projects.
> > 
> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html
> > 
> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#NoticeInSourceFile
> 
> Right, so what is wrong with stating the same thing in two lines:
> 
> "Copyright (c) 2011-2013, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
> 
> This file is licensed under GNU GPLv2. See COPYING for full license text.

The COPYING file may not be present. There may be cases where the absence
of the warranty statement in the header is problematic etc etc.

Corporate legals have their own policies on this and there is no point
fighting them because

- they are the ones qualified to make the decision

- the corporate legal angle is often "do this or don't release it"

- we have huge numbers of files using that same no warranty in every
  file, and major companies who specify it must be present in their code
  releases


Including the without warranty is standard practice at a lot of
companies. It's not even wasting space - it'll compress beautifully as
there are already lots of similar headers all over the tree.

Alan

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (One Thousand Gnomes)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v6 2/5] ARM: Add Krait L2 register accessor functions
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 17:19:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140408171929.68f328a9@alan.etchedpixels.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140408151056.GH30077@pd.tnic>

On Tue, 8 Apr 2014 17:10:56 +0200
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:25:01AM -0400, Christopher Covington wrote:
> > As I understand it, the license authors. They find it important to maintain
> > clarity even when files get copied into other projects.
> > 
> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html
> > 
> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#NoticeInSourceFile
> 
> Right, so what is wrong with stating the same thing in two lines:
> 
> "Copyright (c) 2011-2013, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
> 
> This file is licensed under GNU GPLv2. See COPYING for full license text.

The COPYING file may not be present. There may be cases where the absence
of the warranty statement in the header is problematic etc etc.

Corporate legals have their own policies on this and there is no point
fighting them because

- they are the ones qualified to make the decision

- the corporate legal angle is often "do this or don't release it"

- we have huge numbers of files using that same no warranty in every
  file, and major companies who specify it must be present in their code
  releases


Including the without warranty is standard practice at a lot of
companies. It's not even wasting space - it'll compress beautifully as
there are already lots of similar headers all over the tree.

Alan

  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-08 16:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-04 19:57 [PATCH v6 0/5] Krait L1/L2 EDAC driver Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57 ` [PATCH v6 1/5] genirq: export percpu irq functions for module usage Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57   ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57   ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57 ` [PATCH v6 2/5] ARM: Add Krait L2 register accessor functions Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57   ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-07 20:18   ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-07 20:18     ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-07 21:56     ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-07 21:56       ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-08  6:43       ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08  6:43         ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08 14:25         ` Christopher Covington
2014-04-08 14:25           ` Christopher Covington
2014-04-08 15:10           ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08 15:10             ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08 16:19             ` One Thousand Gnomes [this message]
2014-04-08 16:19               ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-04-08 16:42               ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08 16:42                 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-04 19:57 ` [PATCH v6 3/5] devicetree: bindings: Document Krait cache error interrupts Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57   ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57   ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-08 15:39   ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08 15:39     ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08 19:55     ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-08 19:55       ` Stephen Boyd
     [not found]     ` <20140408153925.GJ30077-fF5Pk5pvG8Y@public.gmane.org>
2014-04-29 10:34       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-04-29 10:34         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-04-29 10:34         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2014-04-29 19:02         ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-29 19:02           ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-29 19:02           ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-04 19:57 ` [PATCH v6 4/5] edac: Add support for Krait CPU cache error detection Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57   ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-08 17:35   ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08 17:35     ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-08 19:54     ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-08 19:54       ` Stephen Boyd
2014-04-09 15:24       ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-09 15:24         ` Borislav Petkov
2014-04-04 19:57 ` [PATCH v6 5/5] ARM: dts: msm: Fix Krait CPU/L2 nodes Stephen Boyd
2014-04-04 19:57   ` Stephen Boyd

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140408171929.68f328a9@alan.etchedpixels.co.uk \
    --to=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=courtney.cavin@sonymobile.com \
    --cc=cov@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.