[coreboot] License changes

Uwe Hermann uwe at hermann-uwe.de
Fri May 14 20:01:10 CEST 2010

On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 07:25:51PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> Oh, it said that the license choice was at my option. Sorry for that.
> Maybe the header should clarify whose option is meant, then.
> I think we should make clear which license we assign to the code. Having

Sure, we already do that (well, in those files which _do_ have license
headers, there are still quite a few which have none).

Some coreboot files are GPL2, some or GPL2-or-later, some are BSD, some may be
other GPL-compatible licenses. The coreboot code as a whole is GPL2-only as a
result, but everyone is free to take out individual GPL2-or-later files and
re-use them in GPL3 projects (which is one of the reasons I use GPL2-or-later).
Or take out a BSD-licensed file and use it in BSD licensed projects etc.
That does not change the fact that coreboot as a whole is GPL2-only.

> code in our tree which is licensed by anyone else's choice (i.e. not the
> authors of coreboot) is a legal concern. Since the complete project is
> v2 only, the headers should reflect this.

They already do, no reason for changes here. In addition, the README also states
the coreboot license pretty clearly IMHO.

> Besides, most Kconfig scripts (which we are talking about here) are
> trivial few-liners indeed.

Sure, not an issue in this case.

http://hermann-uwe.de     | http://sigrok.org
http://randomprojects.org | http://unmaintained-free-software.org

More information about the coreboot mailing list