Re: [PATCH v1] dt-bindings: clock: qcom: Relicense to GPL2 + BSD

From: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>
To: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
Cc: agross@kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org,
	robh+dt@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] dt-bindings: clock: qcom: Relicense to GPL2 + BSD
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 20:37:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YofgAd/nAejaATli@gerhold.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220520124447.31289-1-robert.foss@linaro.org>

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 02:44:47PM +0200, Robert Foss wrote:
> Qualcomm has given permission for all the dt-bindings to be dual
> licensed. All of the Linaro authored bindings are easy to change, in
> terms of the permissions & copyrights, so they've been bundled in this
> commit.
> 
> Additionally clean up the syntax of some of the copyright statements.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
> ---
> 
> There are more Qcom bindings that should have the license updated
> to GPL2+BSD, but since they haven't been authored or copyrighted
> by Linaro, I think I'll have to hunt down the authors individually.
> 
>  include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gcc-msm8998.h          | 2 +-
>  include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.h                | 2 +-
>  include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h                 | 6 ++++--
> 

At least these 3 have contributors outside Qualcomm and Linaro.
Doesn't this mean you would still need to contact all of them
and see if they are fine with relicensing their contribution?

I don't want to make this more complicated than necessary, but it's
probably better to be careful when it comes to licensing stuff...

(Although personally I think it feels a bit weird to discuss copyright
 for a bunch of "numbered names"...)

Thanks,
Stephan