[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [edk2] EDK II & GPL - Re: OVMF BoF @ KVM Forum 2015

From: Jordan Justen
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [edk2] EDK II & GPL - Re: OVMF BoF @ KVM Forum 2015
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 15:24:10 -0700
User-agent: alot/0.3.6

On 2015-09-09 12:11:26, El-Haj-Mahmoud, Samer wrote:
> The recent expansions beyond BSD where all permissive licenses (BSD
> like) as far as I can tell.
> I agree with Andrew, opening the door for GPL licensed code in EDK2
> will have severe consequences for products that are built using
> EDK2.

I don't think simply having a GplDriverPkg in the tree would have any
consequences for a platform that doesn't use any code in that package.
Obviously we could not make any core packages rely on that package.

This would just be a sanctioned, clear landing place for people that
cannot, or will not provide their driver under a permissive license.

This license will limit who can use drivers from this package. For
that reason, I hope that we will always ask if a contribution can be
permissively licensed instead.

Personally, I would prefer a 2-clause BSD only tree for simplicity,
but unfortunately, that sort of restriction has its own drawbacks as
well. (frustrated contributors and less contributions)

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. (And, why that doesn't also apply to FatBinPkg.)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: edk2-devel [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of Jordan Justen
> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 12:58 PM
> To: Andrew Fish <address@hidden>
> Cc: Lenny Szubowicz <address@hidden>; Karen Noel <address@hidden>; Ard 
> Biesheuvel <address@hidden>; edk2-devel-01 <address@hidden>; Reza Jelveh 
> <address@hidden>; Alexander Graf <address@hidden>; qemu devel list 
> <address@hidden>; Hannes Reinecke <address@hidden>; Gabriel L. Somlo (GMail) 
> <address@hidden>; Peter Jones <address@hidden>; Peter Batard 
> <address@hidden>; Gerd Hoffmann <address@hidden>; Cole Robinson 
> <address@hidden>; Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>; address@hidden; Laszlo 
> Ersek <address@hidden>; Ademar de Souza Reis Jr. <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: [edk2] EDK II & GPL - Re: OVMF BoF @ KVM Forum 2015
> On 2015-09-09 10:04:50, Andrew Fish wrote:
> >
> > > On Sep 9, 2015, at 9:17 AM, Jordan Justen <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >
> > > So, related to this, I wonder how the community would feel about a
> > > GplDriverPkg. Would the community allow it as a new package in EDK
> > > II directly, or would a separate repo be required?
> > >
> >
> > I think we would need a separate repo, like the FAT driver. That is
> > the only way to deal with the license issues.
> There doesn't seem to be any guiding rules here. For example, I
> think some people are not comfortable with the FatBinPkg being in
> the tree due to the license. Why is that okay?
> > > With regards to adding it directly into the EDK II tree, here are
> > > some potential concerns that I might anticipate hearing from the 
> > > community:
> > >
> > > * It will make it easier for contributors to choose GPL compared to
> > > a  permissive license, thereby limiting some users of the
> > > contribution
> > >
> > > * GPL code will more easily be copied into the permissively licensed
> > > packages
> > >
> > > * Some might refuse to look at EDK II entirely if it has a directory
> > > with GPL source code in it
> > >
> >
> > Or have their rights to contribute revoked since this is a fundamental
> > change, and would require employees to get reauthorized by their legal
> > departments to contribute.
> We've recently expanded beyond just allowing BSD code into the tree,
> and that appeared to be no big deal. No one brought this up as a
> fundamental change.
> Just to be clear, are you saying Apple probably won't be able to
> contribute to EDK II if there is any GPL licensed code in the tree?
> (Even if it is contained in a clearly indicated package.) I guess
> using dual-licensed BSD/GPL is okay though?
> (EmbeddedPkg/Library/FdtLib)
> -Jordan
> _______________________________________________
> edk2-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel

reply via email to

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