[LinuxBIOS] PATCH: GPL Header for som/ims/p2b code.
uwe at hermann-uwe.de
Mon Oct 9 00:32:01 CEST 2006
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 12:19:26PM -0500, Richard Smith wrote:
> So we should probably do as Uwe says and start including the GPL
> header on all source files.
I agree. Do as Uwe says ;-)
Seriously though, here's a first patch which adds the GPL header to
your som/ims/p2b code. This was an easy one as (accoring to svn logs)
you are the sole author of all the code (please correct me if I'm wrong).
For other parts of the code base some more elaborate investigations
might be needed.
I'd say everyone with svn commit access could/should just add the header
to code where he/she is the sole author and owns all of the copyright
to the code. We can then take care of the more complex cases later.
Note: The header I used in this patch is the "GPLv2 or later" version.
Richard, if you want to use another license, please say so before
this gets committed.
Is there a general guideline as to who licenses their code under which
license? That would make it easier for me to prepare further patches.
Stefan: GPLv2 or later? Who owns the copyright - you or coresystems GmbH
or even SuSE(?)
Ron: Is all of your work on behalf of LANL? Do they own the copyright
or do you? Do you have to use the BSD-like LANL licenseî(see
arch/i386/include/arch/intel.h for an example) or can you just
license your stuff under the GPLv2 or later?
If so, do you want to do so?
Yinghai: Is all of your work on behalf of AMD? AMD owns the copyright
for the code, correct? Is it ok to use the "GPL v2 or later"
header as in this patch for the code?
Richard: Is GPLv2 or later fine? Are you the copyright owner or maybe
a company you work for?
http://www.it-services-uh.de | http://www.crazy-hacks.org
http://www.holsham-traders.de | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the coreboot