From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBF6642871; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 17:19:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0D3840E25; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 17:19:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-yw1-f172.google.com (mail-yw1-f172.google.com [209.85.128.172]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BBC840DF8 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 17:19:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-yw1-f172.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-53d277c1834so360221887b3.10 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:19:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; t=1680189542; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=QaiKmcqFsW1JoRdAVfQjGm+yUkMw3mxmPFcfUipHxuY=; b=AHALtAHDb0t0aHD6Yg0+xVsOxj5SgGqdgVid9pFH8iK2BZPzThdykXc8Gltt8OzAhs euiLQA05ZKyiF/gG3cfBEBc7yXEuIG6hCuEepzop8cx2SiCIYw342JMWXEg9EyW0gag6 vEUMikOyYsg+TxMXEHuRWVBqnk1tQiMbvB58Z0cZRO41oVQ7VRaMzz6ih/8VM71PhDaF TB8SCJFKOckiyqnh6ehk3wQi+iDYhtbQ6Pl7FnxTXCaHz2IWRJJrepizjCVvT/yKytH/ PLBANnzOI0fEaqt0BY22TXEC/x4jYikmbhKdH9UKZvTx6FykpLlJaiUfAHe6EZF3jzOQ 2Z2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1680189542; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=QaiKmcqFsW1JoRdAVfQjGm+yUkMw3mxmPFcfUipHxuY=; b=mU7NpDnAIZlsTLbiRyL2gZz9VQ2JbdmQnmN+9jFnpGWE7djy2Tt4x7dEEbRStn0fuC uI9k6ZMt0amDJ5pccckYPFnJ8Ftt4q3rSMD5ZPqj8a2ma7QWqKS3MO/uYnBPSrQZT2i+ 2OvX13aoEcutKyiFl5KN6ZNE/5KHHyS2fsoxlAB9uYAOjnUG0YDV313onN7soyN2l29z S7cmqb2IjtgISbelf6uac2WydpWaVXl5f4VNgNxsiwigqa1rG2EFDDorbXub2XTFKsNV OBYJV1Zcr1Cxz9o7aQmJlGE+DFL/zjjyotYGyo6c4yOLY3tw+qrY6cdKbTFhNULNkA5w Q+9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9eTdv3+kKN5dUspLa/jONmL43iYjVxWTm5qb0HltTFovmYI13CM tXwakePOiyDMklybpPsGqcILG7o04f1gAxWWv0T81Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350Zx2W2RN6R6XnJFK8E3Zfso7R6T4/h+onItVBlHMwqbLn8vY5fh5W/BzJWU096egV6nXEHkS1PJVtAvbwGPisE= X-Received: by 2002:a0d:ec48:0:b0:545:f7cc:f30 with SMTP id r8-20020a0dec48000000b00545f7cc0f30mr7035815ywn.0.1680189542422; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:19:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230328020826.1269570-1-junfeng.guo@intel.com> <2436497.uoxibFcf9D@thomas> <9576586.lOV4Wx5bFT@thomas> In-Reply-To: <9576586.lOV4Wx5bFT@thomas> From: Rushil Gupta Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:18:51 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net/gve: update copyright holders To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Ferruh Yigit , "Zhang, Qi Z" , "Wu, Jingjing" , "Xing, Beilei" , "Guo, Junfeng" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Joshua Washington , Jeroen de Borst Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d5503605f81f9c8d" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org --000000000000d5503605f81f9c8d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We were just trying to comply with the BSD license to get rid of the exception. You have the MIT license for control path/admin-queue code. Since admin-queue path is similar across linux, freebsd and dpdk the code is similar but not exactly the same, We are about to upstream driver code to FreeBSD under BSD license as well so you will see this code under BSD license soon. I will consult the lawyers on my end as well. On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 6:14=E2=80=AFAM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 30/03/2023 09:20, Guo, Junfeng: > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > 28/03/2023 11:35, Guo, Junfeng: > > > > The background is that, in the past (DPDK 22.11) we didn't get the > > > approval > > > > of license from Google, thus chose the MIT License for the base cod= e, > > > and > > > > BSD-3 License for GVE common code (without the files in /base > folder). > > > > We also left the copyright holder of base code just to Google Inc, > and > > > made > > > > Intel as the copyright holder of GVE common code (without /base > > > folder). > > > > > > > > Today we are working together for GVE dev and maintaining. And we > > > got > > > > the approval of BSD-3 License from Google for the base code. > > > > Thus we dicided to 1) switch the License of GVE base code from MIT = to > > > BSD-3; > > > > 2) add Google LLC as one of the copyright holders for GVE common > > > code. > > > > > > Do you realize we had lenghty discussions in the Technical Board, > > > the Governing Board, and with lawyers, just for this unneeded > exception? > > > > > > Now looking at the patches, there seem to be some big mistakes like > > > removing some copyright. I don't understand how it can be taken so > > > lightly. > > > > > > I regret how fast we were, next time we will surely operate > differently. > > > If you want to improve the reputation of this driver, > > > please ask other copyright holders to be more active and responsive. > > > > > > > Really sorry for causing such severe trouble. > > > > Yes, we did take lots of efforts in the Technical Board and the Governi= ng > > Board about this MIT exception. We really appreciate that. > > > > About this patch set, it is my severe mistake to switch the MIT License > > directly for the upstream-ed code in community, in the wrong way. > > In the past we upstream-ed this driver with MIT License followed from > > the kernel community's gve driver base code. And now we want to > > use the code with BSD-3 License (approved by Google). > > So I suppose that the correct way may be 1) first remove all these code > > under MIT License and 2) then add the new files under BSD-3 License. > > The code under BSD is different of the MIT code? > If it is the same with a new approved license, you can just change the > license. > > > Please correct me if there are still misunderstanding in my statement. > > Thanks Thomas for pointing out my mistake. I'll be careful to fix this. > > > > Copyright holder for the gve base code will stay unchanged. Google LLC > > will be added as one of the copyright holders for the gve common code. > > @Rushil Gupta Please also be more active and responsive for the code > > review and contribution in the community. Thanks! > > > > --000000000000d5503605f81f9c8d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
We were just trying to comply with the BSD license to get = rid=C2=A0of=C2=A0the=C2=A0exception. You have the MIT license for control p= ath/admin-queue code. Since admin-queue path is similar across linux, freeb= sd and dpdk the code is similar but not exactly the same,
We are about = to upstream driver code to FreeBSD=C2=A0under BSD license as well so you wi= ll see this code under BSD license soon. I will consult the lawyers on my e= nd as well.

On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 6:14=E2=80=AFAM Thomas Monjalon &l= t;thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:=
30/03/2023 09:2= 0, Guo, Junfeng:
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > 28/03/2023 11:35, Guo, Junfeng:
> > > The background is that, in the past (DPDK 22.11) we didn'= ;t get the
> > approval
> > > of license from Google, thus chose the MIT License for the b= ase code,
> > and
> > > BSD-3 License for GVE common code (without the files in /bas= e folder).
> > > We also left the copyright holder of base code just to Googl= e Inc, and
> > made
> > > Intel as the copyright holder of GVE common code (without /b= ase
> > folder).
> > >
> > > Today we are working together for GVE dev and maintaining. A= nd we
> > got
> > > the approval of BSD-3 License from Google for the base code.=
> > > Thus we dicided to 1) switch the License of GVE base code fr= om MIT to
> > BSD-3;
> > > 2) add Google LLC as one of the copyright holders for GVE co= mmon
> > code.
> >
> > Do you realize we had lenghty discussions in the Technical Board,=
> > the Governing Board, and with lawyers, just for this unneeded exc= eption?
> >
> > Now looking at the patches, there seem to be some big mistakes li= ke
> > removing some copyright. I don't understand how it can be tak= en so
> > lightly.
> >
> > I regret how fast we were, next time we will surely operate diffe= rently.
> > If you want to improve the reputation of this driver,
> > please ask other copyright holders to be more active and responsi= ve.
> >
>
> Really sorry for causing such severe trouble.
>
> Yes, we did take lots of efforts in the Technical Board and the Govern= ing
> Board about this MIT exception. We really appreciate that.
>
> About this patch set, it is my severe mistake to switch the MIT Licens= e
> directly for the upstream-ed code in community, in the wrong way.
> In the past we upstream-ed this driver with MIT License followed from<= br> > the kernel community's gve driver base code. And now we want to > use the code with BSD-3 License (approved by Google).
> So I suppose that the correct way may be 1) first remove all these cod= e
> under MIT License and 2) then add the new files under BSD-3 License.
The code under BSD is different of the MIT code?
If it is the same with a new approved license, you can just change the lice= nse.

> Please correct me if there are still misunderstanding in my statement.=
> Thanks Thomas for pointing out my mistake. I'll be careful to fix = this.
>
> Copyright holder for the gve base code will stay unchanged. Google LLC=
> will be added as one of the copyright holders for the gve common code.=
> @Rushil Gupta Please also be more active and responsive for the code > review and contribution in the community. Thanks!



--000000000000d5503605f81f9c8d--