From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:6f8:1178:4:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1P3lV3-000768-Ej for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 07 Oct 2010 08:06:51 +0000 Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:06:46 +0200 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20101007080646.GB28242@pengutronix.de> References: <20101005135213.24F871539A0@gemini.denx.de> <20101006072749.GR28242@pengutronix.de> <20101006135644.8D7051539A0@gemini.denx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101006135644.8D7051539A0@gemini.denx.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: barebox-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Code "borrowed" without attribution to original authors To: Wolfgang Denk Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 03:56:44PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Sascha, > > In message <20101006072749.GR28242@pengutronix.de> you wrote: > > > > > We all have been working long enough in free and open source software > > > projects that I can assume you are well aware of the basic principles > > > of open source software licensing and the requirement to attribute > > > code to its original authors. > > > > Does that mean U-Boot has credits to all the original mtd authors when > > updating U-Boots mtd support to a newer kernel? /me is digging in the > > archives; no, it has not. Does that mean with > > We try hard to properly attribute code to the original sources. I do > not claim that everything in U-Boot is perfect, and if you look long > enough (and especially far enough back into our 10+ years of > history), you probably can find exceptions. We are trying to improve, > and we take all hints on such topics serious. > > In each and everycase, whenever someone asked us (either on the > U-Boot mailing list or directly) about Copyright issues or similar > topics, we always addressed these questions directly and as good as > possible. Please feel free to search the archives. > > > In the specific case of MTD updates you mention here the commit > messages (extracted with "git log drivers/mtd") contain for example: > > commit 6cd752f9: > ... > The check condition is similat to what is in linux/next. > > commit 18b5a4b4: > ... > This makes it similar to what is in the kernel NAND driver. > > commit aad4a28b: > ... > This was originally part of Thomas Gleixner's patch for > adding support for 4KiB pages. > This is not part of the U-Boot NAND driver so updating the > driver with this to sync up with the kernel NAND driver. > > commit 4f41e7ea: > ... > This patch updates the "chip_shift" calculation in the > NAND driver. This is being done to sync up the NAND driver with > the kernel NAND driver. > > commit aaa8eec5: > ... > This patch adds support for NANDs greater than 2 GB. > Patch is based on the MTD NAND driver in the kernel. > > commit 154b5484: > ... > Update chipselect handling in davinci_nand.c so that it can > handle 2 GByte chips the same way Linux does: as one device, > > commit 8d2effea: > ... > This patch brings the U-Boot MTD infrastructure in sync with the current > Linux MTD version (2.6.30-rc3). Biggest change is the 64bit device size > support and a resync of the mtdpart.c file which has seen multiple fixes > meanwhile. > > commit c45912d8: > ... > NAND: sync with 2.6.27 > > This brings the core NAND code up to date with the Linux kernel. > > commit cfa460ad: > ... > Update MTD to that of Linux 2.6.22.1 > > A lot changed in the Linux MTD code, since it was last ported from > Linux to U-Boot. This patch takes U-Boot NAND support to the level > of Linux 2.6.22.1 and will enable support for very large NAND devices > > etc. > > As you can see, we try to document where such code is coming from. > > > > 9b7076229ec6a958bd835ab70745f7676297ce82 Ilya Yanok is the original > > author of jffs2 summary support? No, it's the same in the Linux kernel. > > No, he is not. Yes, you are right, proper attibution is missing in > this commit, too. Such cases can happen, even with sevral people > reviewing the submitted patches. > > But as you can see from the many examples above we at least _try_ to > be careful about code atributions and copyrights. > > > > Does that mean you are the original author of include/linux/list.h in > > 700a0c648df72f2c8e0589c0d0470b5ffd7cab7b? Obviously not. > > Ah, you have to go back to an example from 5 years ago? At the time > of that patch, the whole git project was just a mere 4 months old, > and git version control had been used for the Linux kernel for just a > very few weeks. There was no tradition to have Signed-off-by: lines > yet, etc. Many things were far from perfect, then. > > But even then, the first line of the commit message reads: > > Add common (with Linux) MTD partition scheme and ... > > The wording "common (with Linux)" may not be really good either, but > at least it's a pretty clear hint. And the file in question is > located in include/linux/ , which also carries a certain meaning. > > We have learned our lessons since then. > > And if someone points out errors in our processes, we are answerable > for our mistakes and try to improve. > > > > Please lets go not down that road, it leads to nowhere. > > > > We obviously copy code from other projects like U-Boot and the kernel > > and we do our best to keep the copyrights intact, but we can only do > > this on a per file base, not on a per commit base. That said, > > Please explain why it should be impossible in a commit message to say > that the hundreds of lines of code you add were not written by the > signees, but taken from somewhare else? In the examples I listed one > could even give the corresponding git commit ID from the U-Boot repo, > for example: > > 0ceafe1 Replace direct header access with the API routines > ... > Copied from U-Boot commit b97a2a0 > > Do you think such a short hint cannot be done? We can (and actually I prefered Jean-Christophe had done it) add a hint in the commit log saying that the code is derived from U-Boot, but I will not dig through the U-Boot commit log to see who actually made a commit looking similar to a barebox commit, and I do not expect anyone to do so. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox