grub-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AFS and BFS removed. Unacceptable license.


From: Dee Sharpe
Subject: Re: AFS and BFS removed. Unacceptable license.
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 10:22:00 -0500

Ok, so I'd assume that the AFS driver needs to be rewritten. Is it absolutely 
mandatory that copyright be assigned to the FSF?

A. Demetrious Sharpe

It's not a question of why I'm better than you,
it's a question of why you're not as good as me.
The fact that you fail to see the difference between the two, answers both 
questions!

Sent from my iPhone4

On Oct 29, 2011, at 4:37 AM, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' 
Serbinenko<address@hidden> wrote:

> An unfortunate discovery has been done: our AFS code is based on
> fsys_afs.c and afs.h from Syllable GRUB Legacy. The files in question
> are not under FSF copyright, not licence-compatible and it wasn't
> announced what's the code based on when the patch was sent or committed.
> While first one is a minor issue I could grant exception for, the 2
> other ones are fatal. I remind to all of you that a license-incompatible
> can put the whole project in jeopardy and the need of both announcing
> where code came from (refer to your copyright assignment if you have
> one) and proper acknowledgement and traceability. The later is very
> important if the code can come from several possible sources. In this
> case if the code has been based on Haiku's BFS it would have been fine,
> unfortunately it wasn't, without proper traceability it's hard to
> differentiate between such cases.
> 
> -- 
> Regards
> Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]