Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > >> So my understanding is that when we are talking about _significant_ >> additions to builtin/blame.c (the current patches don't qualify as such >> really) that >> >> a) builtin/blame.c is licensed under GPLv2 >> b) significant contributions to it will not be relicensed under >> different licenses without the respective contributors' explicit >> consent. > > Yep, that's how it works. > > [...] >> The combination of the SubmittingPatches text with the file notices in >> builtin/blame.c is not really painting a full picture of the situation. > > Any idea how this could be made more clear? E.g., maybe we should > bite the bullet and add a line to all source files that don't already > state a license: > > /* > * License: GPLv2. See COPYING for details. > */
I vaguely recall that jgit folks at one point wanted to lift this implementation and were interested in seeing it to be dual licensed to BSD but that was a long time ago. http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/JGIT-Blame-functionality-for-jgit-td2142726.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
