✗ patchtest: failure for Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.

✗ patchtest: failure for Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.
Revision: 1
URL   : https://patchwork.openembedded.org/series/24527/
State : failure

== Summary ==


Thank you for submitting this patch series to OpenEmbedded Core. This is
an automated response. Several tests have been executed on the proposed
series by patchtest resulting in the following failures:



* Patch            Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.
 Issue             Shortlog does not follow expected format [test_shortlog_format] 
  Suggested fix    Commit shortlog (first line of commit message) should follow the format "<target>: <summary>"

* Issue             Added patch file is missing Upstream-Status in the header [test_upstream_status_presence_format] 
  Suggested fix    Add Upstream-Status: <Valid status> to the header of meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls/0001-Modied-the-license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch
  Standard format  Upstream-Status: <Valid status>
  Valid status     Pending, Accepted, Backport, Denied, Inappropriate [reason], Submitted [where]



If you believe any of these test results are incorrect, please reply to the
mailing list (openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org) raising your concerns.
Otherwise we would appreciate you correcting the issues and submitting a new
version of the patchset if applicable. Please ensure you add/increment the
version number when sending the new version (i.e. [PATCH] -> [PATCH v2] ->
[PATCH v3] -> ...).

---
Guidelines:     https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines
Test framework: http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/patchtest
Test suite:     http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/patchtest-oe

Re: [OE-core][PATCH] Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2020-06-09 at 01:54 +0800, zhengruoqin wrote:
> Please reference to https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/issues/1018.
> 
> Upstream-Status: Submitted
> [https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/merge_requests/1285].
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zheng Ruoqin <zhengrq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  ...license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch | 88
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls_3.6.13.bb       |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls/0001-Modied-
> the-license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch

No, you simply cannot just do that.

If upstream takes the patch we can apply as a backport but until they
accept a license change we can and will not.

Just because the license file says something doesn't mean every file is
under that license if that file's header says differently.

I suspect upstream won't accept this patch either.

Cheers,

Richard

[OE-core][PATCH] Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.

[zhengruoqin]

Please reference to https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/issues/1018.

Upstream-Status: Submitted
[https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/merge_requests/1285].

Signed-off-by: Zheng Ruoqin <zhengrq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
 ...license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls_3.6.13.bb       |  1 +
 2 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls/0001-Modied-the-license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch

diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls/0001-Modied-the-license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch b/meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls/0001-Modied-the-license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..89682b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls/0001-Modied-the-license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+From a5f05cd4bc2bae3803e7cf8d7ae3dfa9abb34110 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Lei Maohui <leimaohui@cn.fujitsu.com>
+Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 16:15:07 +0900
+Subject: [PATCH] Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.
+
+Signed-off-by: Lei Maohui <leimaohui@cn.fujitsu.com>
+---
+ lib/x509/krb5.c | 20 +++++++++++---------
+ lib/x509/krb5.h | 20 +++++++++++---------
+ 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/lib/x509/krb5.c b/lib/x509/krb5.c
+index 7fe84e651..d68c73757 100644
+--- a/lib/x509/krb5.c
++++ b/lib/x509/krb5.c
+@@ -1,21 +1,23 @@
+ /*
+  * Copyright (C) 2015 Red Hat, Inc.
+  *
++ * Author: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
++ *
+  * This file is part of GnuTLS.
+  *
+- * GnuTLS is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it
+- * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+- * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
+- * (at your option) any later version.
++ * The GnuTLS is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
++ * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License
++ * as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2.1 of
++ * the License, or (at your option) any later version.
+  *
+- * GnuTLS is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
++ * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
+  * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+  * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
+- * General Public License for more details.
++ * Lesser General Public License for more details.
++ *
++ * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public License
++ * along with this program.  If not, see <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/>
+  *
+- * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+- * along with this program.  If not, see
+- * <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
+  */
+ 
+ #include <config.h>
+diff --git a/lib/x509/krb5.h b/lib/x509/krb5.h
+index d8926af67..815bb28f7 100644
+--- a/lib/x509/krb5.h
++++ b/lib/x509/krb5.h
+@@ -1,21 +1,23 @@
+ /*
+  * Copyright (C) 2015 Red Hat, Inc.
+  *
++ * Author: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
++ *
+  * This file is part of GnuTLS.
+  *
+- * GnuTLS is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it
+- * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+- * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
+- * (at your option) any later version.
++ * The GnuTLS is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
++ * modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License
++ * as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2.1 of
++ * the License, or (at your option) any later version.
+  *
+- * GnuTLS is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
++ * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
+  * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+  * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
+- * General Public License for more details.
++ * Lesser General Public License for more details.
++ *
++ * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public License
++ * along with this program.  If not, see <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/>
+  *
+- * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+- * along with this program.  If not, see
+- * <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
+  */
+ 
+ #ifndef GNUTLS_LIB_X509_KRB5_H
+-- 
+2.17.1
+
diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls_3.6.13.bb b/meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls_3.6.13.bb
index f56d42a..594cb0f 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls_3.6.13.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls_3.6.13.bb
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ SHRT_VER = "${@d.getVar('PV').split('.')[0]}.${@d.getVar('PV').split('.')[1]}"
 
 SRC_URI = "https://www.gnupg.org/ftp/gcrypt/gnutls/v${SHRT_VER}/gnutls-${PV}.tar.xz \
            file://arm_eabi.patch \
+           file://0001-Modied-the-license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch \
 "
 
 SRC_URI[md5sum] = "bb1fe696a11543433785b4fc70ca225f"
-- 
1.8.3.1

Re: [OE-core][PATCH] Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.

[zhengruoqin]

Hi Richard

> No, you simply cannot just do that.
> 
> If upstream takes the patch we can apply as a backport but until they accept a
> license change we can and will not.
> 

> Just because the license file says something doesn't mean every file is under
> that license if that file's header says differently.
> 
OK, I got it.

> I suspect upstream won't accept this patch either.
I'm sorry, but I don't know if you noticed https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/issues/1018 . 
Our team have dicussed this issue in gnutls's gitlab, and the community has recognized this modify.


--------------------------------------------------
Zheng Ruoqin
Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST)
ADDR.: No.6 Wenzhu Road, Software Avenue,
       Nanjing, 210012, China
MAIL : zhengrq.fnst@cn.fujistu.com



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 5:33 PM
> To: Zheng, Ruoqin/郑 若钦 <zhengrq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>; openembedded-
> core@lists.openembedded.org
> Subject: Re: [OE-core][PATCH] Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with
> LICENSE file.
> 
> On Tue, 2020-06-09 at 01:54 +0800, zhengruoqin wrote:
> > Please reference to https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/issues/1018.
> >
> > Upstream-Status: Submitted
> > [https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/merge_requests/1285].
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zheng Ruoqin <zhengrq.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > ---
> >  ...license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch | 88
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls_3.6.13.bb       |  1 +
> >  2 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 meta/recipes-support/gnutls/gnutls/0001-Modied-
> > the-license-to-GPLv2.1-to-keep-with-LICENSE-f.patch
> 
> No, you simply cannot just do that.
> 
> If upstream takes the patch we can apply as a backport but until they accept a
> license change we can and will not.
> 
> Just because the license file says something doesn't mean every file is under
> that license if that file's header says differently.
> 
> I suspect upstream won't accept this patch either.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard
> 
> 

Re: [OE-core][PATCH] Modied the license to GPLv2.1+ to keep with LICENSE file.

[Richard Purdie]

On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 01:20 +0000, Zheng, Ruoqin wrote:
> Hi Richard
> 
> > No, you simply cannot just do that.
> > 
> > If upstream takes the patch we can apply as a backport but until
> > they accept a
> > license change we can and will not.
> > 
> > Just because the license file says something doesn't mean every
> > file is under
> > that license if that file's header says differently.
> > 
> OK, I got it.
> 
> > I suspect upstream won't accept this patch either.
> I'm sorry, but I don't know if you noticed 
> https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/issues/1018 . 
> Our team have dicussed this issue in gnutls's gitlab, and the
> community has recognized this modify.

Having the upstream author recognise this means we can make the change
but we need to quote that in the patch with a reference, specifically
the comment:

"I see from the log that I'm the only one who touched this file, so as
far as I'm concerned this is the same license as the rest of gnutls.
Feel free to update the license to right one." and a reference that if
came from https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/issues/1018

We have to be extremely careful about licence changes like this.

If we can backport an upstream patch that would be even better.

Cheers,

Richard