Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:54:17 +0400
From: Solar Designer <>
Subject: licensing


Please don't be creative about license terms.  The license terms you put
in 7z_fmt_plug.c are subtly different from all other licenses that we
use.  They appear to be similar to this:

Why did you do that?  Can you just use our project's most common
cut-down BSD license (which is a strict subset of N-clause BSD licenses,
reduced to being all-permissive copyright-only license)?

Then, e.g. opencl_keyring_fmt.c, which you also committed just recently,
lacks copyright and license statements for you and magnum.  It only
includes such a statement for Lukas' work, leaving it unclear if your
and magnum's changes are licensed under the same or different terms.
Instead of comments like:

 * Modified by Dhiru
 * Lots of fixes by magnum
 * Copyright Lukas
 * <license here>

we need comments like:

 * Copyright Dhiru
 * Copyright magnum
 * Copyright Lukas
 * <license here>
 * <optionally describe who wrote what portion, etc. here>

The order of Copyright lines is arbitrary, although it makes sense to
specify the original author(s) or/and the authors who contributed to the
given source file or component most first.

Similarly, opencl/ gives copyright notices for
"Southern Storm Software, Pty Ltd." and "Christophe Devine", but only
says that the file was "Modified in May of 2012 by Dhiru Kholia for JtR".
I think it'd be best if you add a copyright notice for your changes too.

(Actually, from a technical standpoint, it'd be best if we don't add yet
another and less-optimized implementation of SHA-256, which is what this
kernel contains, but this posting is about licensing.)



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.