On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 05:41:59PM -0700, Jordan Justen wrote: > On 2015-09-09 16:05:20, Andrew Fish wrote: > > > > > On Sep 9, 2015, at 3:24 PM, Jordan Justen <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com> > > > wrot> > > FWIW, I don't mind if the consensus is that GplDriverPkg must > > > live in > > > a separate repo. But, it would be nice to hear a good reason why it > > > must live elsewhere. > > > > Because GPL is not a permissive license. An accidental git grep and > > copying some code can change the license of the code that gets the > > GPL code pasted into it. > > I like this argument. It is slightly tempered by the fact that git > grep always shows the source path, and thus 'GplDriverPkg' would be > obviously visible.
Plenty of projects have a scenario in which different parts of their codebase are under different licenses, without there being undue problems. If you make it clear by having a separate directory, then I think you can ultimately credit the developers with having enough intelligence to do the right thing here. If not, then I'd probably question whether you can trust them to submit any code at all, as they could equally have blindly copied it from a 3rd party project under an incompatible license. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
