[coreboot] GPL license headers

[Martin Roth]

I haven't seen any disagreement that we get rid of the entire third paragraph.

Alex votes that we should get rid of the second paragraph of the
header as well, and what Ron posted SEEMS to support that we can,
although the wording in that license header might be different enough
that it doesn't apply to our case.

Personally, I'm in favor of keeping the second paragraph.  It looks to
me like the first paragraph just discusses distribution, not
liability.  I don't really see any NEED to get rid of the second
paragraph.

Are there any other thoughts either way on getting rid of the second paragraph?

Martin



On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Alex G. <mr.nuke.me at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/20/2015 10:54 AM, ron minnich wrote:
>> Eben Moglen, who ought to know, guided us on the release rules for the
>> Plan 9 GPL release.
>>
>> Here is what he told us could go in each file:
>> /*
>>  * This file is part of the UCB release of Plan 9. It is subject to the
>> license
>>  * terms in the LICENSE file found in the top-level directory of this
>>  * distribution and at http://akaros.cs.berkeley.edu/files/Plan9License. No
>>  * part of the UCB release of Plan 9, including this file, may be copied,
>>  * modified, propagated, or distributed except according to the terms
>> contained
>>  * in the LICENSE file.
>>  */
>
> +2
>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:30 AM Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi at google.com
>> <mailto:pgeorgi at google.com>> wrote:
>>     Get (the right set of) lawyers to sign off on that.
>
> You were saying, Patrick?
>
> Alex
>
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
> http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot