From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,LIST_MIRROR_RECEIVED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC0251F852 for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:50:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230337AbiBLSun (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:50:43 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:58632 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230023AbiBLSun (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:50:43 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x102c.google.com (mail-pj1-x102c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 286426007A for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:50:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x102c.google.com with SMTP id d9-20020a17090a498900b001b8bb1d00e7so11877867pjh.3 for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:50:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:references:from:cc:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gvFGNQfbbH6+24B2H7W9t/ZaYRBfZDsnTYADFmvlHpM=; b=AvlYagmIQ5mKwi73yAWh9eMx30TkuIspunGoz7wDbWXIU8sAavx4CvTCiehhvmPgDH ng+MCVuStXqHO9lX3l/+tYs2K5u+fm3woOILMmUr27Kbzbb5K4NRAmo8dMx4RDV2PCBB JtW5dC2KOt3tGfEU6d7L+usdk1uM7lkcteCmLGaGXD7mMF13/Y/s1zDti0x+JpWx53aM JRKFyt5E22Az5AY83y5o2Sacin1Pd/Ncq5vhMDjREV6BG1I7OpkU950iULh/l312Doh5 PQ9lDjoHfRC+FdclrVF1nrEB74it2iAISKwLKiaKLazE+A+pt9vbGasc+o6fJWPDP08/ BXgA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:cc:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=gvFGNQfbbH6+24B2H7W9t/ZaYRBfZDsnTYADFmvlHpM=; b=rY+1taOBnim3e7sdM/tM7Sxduitgz0ASvD3s5BaWPt1RHD+hhnOclJb/Aqy7SacOBA lruaf6F22yJdPXkrDJ4usYnK/pb9TkNrC4s2OZadaaxTtQHuuOYZTh7XyhH8nLYCvdzD NxkvEYCop2G1pVYkuZKsqMOt8hcX5oPnuOpACjQftvJY+zlf6OW95pA8x2IdTV9kTZZF ll8C6+dFIcGLh3SHeqcEwHEfiHdS3RjXvXnt8hXYcGcgT7yfQL1QCN6jNWEsse+bqREh TX7PQoubmArYSNDVDFwiQOqEMS1Av8JFwkA8KNpxWhLVWkccH/lnlx8c/eoj6Lt15AQN 1UnA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530xczoUQOgLBSkXyyY8MrYwxUXtj1YCVojI0UsteiHh5ih9aqyk qRN1WxceINaQA0OQ0JIjySE0az0SbTM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzS44kw8stAzXev4TrLRNtJaFRMAuh2ZabvIIBRlui2EaGz+SyPXwLODN4BqPB3PNphXeB7ww== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:be0e:: with SMTP id r14mr6917210pls.121.1644691838484; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:50:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.108] ([183.82.176.65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q40sm8661990pjq.19.2022.02.12.10.50.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:50:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [RFC] clarify licensing terms for .git/hooks/*.sample files To: Junio C Hamano References: From: Kaartic Sivaraam Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2022 00:20:35 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 07/02/22 12:21 pm, Junio C Hamano wrote: > When a new repository is created by end-user, the template material > are copied from /usr/share/git-core/templates directory, including > sample hook scripts. > > As the source code of Git itself is licensed under GPL-2.0, by > default, these come under the same license. Some end-users may > worry that this might "contaminate" their project's licensing > status. > > Let's add some text to clarify _our_ intention. > > What is added is merely a draft for discussion. The commit > references and author idents point at the right commits and people > whose input matters in today's contents of each file and we'll have > to contact them and have them agree what license they want to have > the current contents of the file under. > FWIW, this does sound like a good thing to do. > I am contemplating to relicense all my work under templates/hooks--* > under either MIT or BSD-3-Clause, but some sample hooks do not have > my input and the choice of course will be up to their authors. > > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano > --- > > cf. https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqbl07mrp3.fsf@gitster.g/ > > templates/hooks--LICENSE | 256 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 256 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 templates/hooks--LICENSE > > diff --git a/templates/hooks--LICENSE b/templates/hooks--LICENSE > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000..f6834f312b > --- /dev/null > +++ b/templates/hooks--LICENSE > @@ -0,0 +1,256 @@ > +The *.sample hook scripts installed in this repository have been > +copied from Git source code by "git init". Because Git itself as a > +whole is licensed under the GPL-2.0 license [*1*], some people have > +raised concerns if these scripts somehow contaminate the contents > +developed by the end users and stored in their repository. > + > +While we, Git developers, are not your lawyers, we believe the > +presence of these sample hook scripts in your repository does not > +constitute "distribution" that makes the contents tracked in your > +repository governed also under the same license as ours, but it would > +be a good idea to clarify that > + > + * We do not intend to spread the license of Git to your contents by > + copying the sample hook scripts. > + > + * These sample hook scripts may be under licenses other than GPL-2.0. > + > +The list below describes under which open-source license each sample > +hook script is licensed. > + The above seems to read well to me. > +---- > + > +NEEDSWORK: > + > +Below are draft entries that do show correct commit object names that > +matter to, or contributors who write, the surviving contents of the > +file, but these people haven't been asked to do anything yet (hence > +they haven't responded yet, of course), so they do not show what the > +licensing status of these files will be at the end of this exercise > +yet. > + > +What I am hoping to achieve is to replace the text under each bullet > +point to document who the authors/copyright holders are of the file, > +and under what license the copy given to each end-user repository is > +usable by the end-user. It would be more useful if the license chosen > +(which can be different per file) is more lenient than strict. > + > +---- > [ ... snip ...] > + > +* prepare-commit-msg.sample > + > + Kaartic Sivaraam > + b22a3079466b72e8a8b76065d6c28efe7eea4b16 (clean-up) > + For my part, I would be fine if we license contents of prepare-commit-msg.sample under the MIT license. -- Sivaraam