Re: meeting minutes: Linux kernel enforcement statement / GPL Cooperation Commitment
toggle quoted message Show quoted text
So if I can summarize my the situation we're discussing:
1) The additional permission is from one or more of many authors and would only apply in a situation where that author(s)' code is being enforced as part of a work.
2) The license for the file, any resultant binary or the work would not change.
3) The KES was never drafted as a license exception that would apply to a file or compiled work.
I think my concerns can be summarized as:
A) Has there ever been a SPDX license exception where the exception only applied to only an individual's contributions of code in a file or work? We often rely on license headers or statements in LICENSE or COPYING files to identify a license exception. Here we would need to go to the KES in the documentation file and then cross check that against the git commit itself to identify the author.
B) If the license for the file, compiled binary or overall work are not modified under this situation, what role does SPDX play in a file distributed between parties? What about in a SPDX license identifier?
D) I'm concerned about the concept the DCO captures a KES on contribution. Further how would that be tracked?
D) If we accept A), how likely is it this will be misapplied? Should we enable this at all?
On Sat, Dec 1, 2018, 3:09 PM James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@... wrote:
On Sat, 2018-12-01 at 14:36 -0500, Michael Dolan wrote: