[linux-elitists] Update on Getting Shlomi Fish's Emails Unbanned from vger.kernel.org (for submitting a kernel patch and getting help with git on the Better-SCM site)
rick at linuxmafia.com
Fri Mar 30 16:31:04 PDT 2012
Quoting Karsten M. Self (karsten at linuxmafia.com):
> Indeed. And I'd read of that, wasn't thinking of it when I wrote my
> quip though.
> Is it required that the person coding be the person signing off?
> Is there any analog in the Linux kernel development process? Debian has
> a few discussions of freedoms, among them the desert island and
> dissident tests. These are for judging licenses, not code acceptence
> practices, but there's a relationship between the two. While a
> kernel-hacking Crusoe might care for noteriety, the dissident might not:
Greg provided the appropriate reference, but I thought I'd add an
(interested outsider's) observation or two of my own.
The organisers of the kernel project aren't legally obliged to prove
past question that every patchset has copyright clearance, but are
aiming for being covered for 'due diligence' standards: They require
the submitting party to certify knowledge of a permission grant by the
copyright owner, and sufficient rights to make that grant meaningful.
Thus, a _truly_ anonymous author's work cannot be accepted, as the
submitter (at least) needs to be in a position to certify knowledge of
provenance -- at minimum, that 'some other person' certified creation
or right to submit the work under 'an appropriate open source license'.
Thus, the kernel maintainers make sure they can reasonably claim
good-faith reliance on the submitter's sign-off certifying permission
grant and sufficient rights. That doesn't absolutely prevent copyright
infringement (hardly anything could), but should powerfully protect the
Rick Moen "Commas are probably the most misunderstood of all
rick at linuxmafia.com punctuation. They frequently dress in black, listen
McQ! (4x80) to sad music, and cut themselves." -- FakeAPStylebook
More information about the linux-elitists