"Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams@xxxxxxx> writes: > I cannot agree to the D-C-O in good faith, since it speaks of open > source licenses, a group of licenses that include non-free software > licenses, something which I cannot support. DCO is not something you "agree to". Are you the original author of the patch, and have the right to submit it under the license "indicated in the file"? The overall license of git is GPLv2, and that is what applies to unless there is an explicit license term indicated in the file otherwise. We do have some code under different licenses in some parts of the system, but the files that you are touching are all GPLv2. Can you certify that your patch is yours and you have rights to make it part of git under the same terms as the original? Or can you not? There is nothing for you to "agree to"; just a simple "yes or no", and I hope the answer is yes in this case, judging from your gnu.org address. > Oh, and maybe add a test like t/t5705-clone-2gb.sh? > > Thank you, that is a very good idea. Nah, one blob that is over 2gb, deltified against something else? That's a bit too much for a test script. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html