Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 17 Jun 2009, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: >> >> I would suggest the following update to the DCO, it makes it more >> general both to free software hackers, and open source hackers alike. > > And I would suggest that Junio just not take patches from people who > aren't able to read the existing DCO. It's not worth the pain. > > Linus Thanks for trying to reduce my load. Very much appreciated. Even though I am _not_ a nice person, I _am_ a practical one. Before stopping to pay attention to this thread, I'll quote from my response once more to ask a simple yes-or-no questions to Alfred. 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? So Alfred, "yes"? or "no"? If "yes", you can send a sign-off. Of course you can choose not to even if the answer is "yes", but then we can choose to ignore your patch, too; and in fact we probably have to. -- 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