From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 11:57:40 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 3/5] COPYING: add exception about patch licensing In-Reply-To: <56C750A1.5050908@lucaceresoli.net> (Luca Ceresoli's message of "Fri, 19 Feb 2016 18:28:01 +0100") References: <1454365196-26319-1-git-send-email-luca@lucaceresoli.net> <1454365196-26319-4-git-send-email-luca@lucaceresoli.net> <20160203230208.GB3428@free.fr> <56BBBB2A.1060706@mind.be> <56C750A1.5050908@lucaceresoli.net> Message-ID: <8737shxdjv.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Luca" == Luca Ceresoli writes: Hi, > Here's what I've been able to come up with so far. It's basically: > - the sum of the present thread, plus > - a reduced and modified version of the preamble suggested in the > GNU GPL itself (section "How to Apply These Terms to Your New > Programs"), plus > - the statement that BR is GPLv2+ except where differently stated, > as Arnout suggested. > I'm sure this needs further discussion and improvements. > -------------------------8<---------------------- > With the exceptions below, Buildroot is distributed under the terms of > the GNU General Public License, reproduced below; either version 2 of > the License, or (at your option) any later version. > Some files in Buildroot contain a different license statement. Those > files are licensed under the license contained in the file itself. > Buildroot also bundles patch files, which are applied to the sources > of the various packages. Those patches are not covered by the license > of Buildroot. Instead, they are covered by the license of the software > to which the patches are applied. When said software is available > under multiple licenses, the Buildroot patches are only provided under > the publicly accessible licenses. This sounds good to me. Do anyone disagree or can this be committed to master? -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard