--- Comment #1 from fontaine.fabrice(a)gmail.com ---
Here is a quote from Yann's answer (from the Merge Request):
This patch originates from the Buildroot project, and it is our policy that we
want to push our patches upstream, which Fabrice took on him to do with that
This patch has a proper assignment trail, with the usual "signed-off-by" tags
(aka the DCO) like are used in the Linux kernel:
- Dave, initial author who submitted the patch to the Buildroot project
- I, Yann, who modified the patch
- Fabrice, who eventually took it from the Buildroot project and submitted
As for the licensing, we have a clear position in the Buildroot project, that
the patches submitted to Buildroot are under the upstream licenses.
All of the above combined makes it fully legit for Fabrice to submit here a
patch that he did not author. The only nit here, maybe, is that Fabrice should
probably have had the git-author field be Dave, not himself, though.
This patch also only touches the build files. Of course the license for those
is also important; still, the changes are trivial enough: there are only 6 new
non-empty lines, and the other changes modify existing lines. As such, I
understand they do fall below the "significant blocks of new code (10 lines or
greater)" threshold defined in the contribution guidelines and thus do not
require any further licensing notice.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.