30/03/2023 09:20, 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 base code,
> > 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 Governing
> 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!