From: Ralf Corsepius <ralf.corsepius@rtems.org>
To: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, binutils@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Switching GAS to GPLv3
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:51:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1185202505.10535.66.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4694E508.2020302@redhat.com>
On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 15:11 +0100, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
>
> > What does this mean for backporting fixes from binutils trunk to older
> > binutils releases?
> > Does this mean backports are not possible at all, or do we have to
> > relicense our legacy releases (that we want to backport stuff to) to GPLv3?
>
> I have received this reply from the FSF:
>
> : Since the previous releases were licensed under GPLv2 or later, all
> : maintainers need to do is upgrade their backport to GPLv3 or later -- then
> : they'll be able to incorporate patches that were never released under
> : GPLv2.
> :
> : If there's enough demand for this, you may be able to make life easier for
> : those maintainers, if you want, by providing patches that upgrade the
> : license on binutils from "GPLv2 or later" to "GPLv3 or later." Hopefully
> : those would be easy to generate after you did this upgrade for the code
> : yourself, and each maintainer wouldn't have to do the work themselves.
> : After you published them, backport maintainers could apply them to their
> : own backports, and then also go ahead to incorporate later patches that
> : were released under GPLv3 or later.
>
> So the answer appears to be that in order to apply patches made to GPLv3
> sources to previous releases we have to change the affected files over
> to the GPLv3 as well.
In my understanding everybody who submits patches to binutils must have
a copyright assignment to the FSF on file (unless patches are considered
trivial).
I am I wrong in presuming that a patch contributed under a copyright
assignment can be implied to cover GPLv2 and GPLv3?
In other words, if I's submit a patch against a GPLv3'd version of a
package I'd implicitly assume my patch also to be applicable to a
GPLv2'd version of the package.
Ralf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-23 14:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-03 11:30 Nick Clifton
2007-07-03 12:43 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-07-03 14:27 ` Nick Clifton
2007-07-03 14:51 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2007-07-11 16:19 ` Nick Clifton
2007-07-23 15:51 ` Ralf Corsepius [this message]
2007-07-23 20:29 ` Bernd Jendrissek
2007-07-24 11:01 ` Nick Clifton
2007-07-03 13:30 ` l l
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1185202505.10535.66.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local \
--to=ralf.corsepius@rtems.org \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=nickc@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).