Re: [CryptoAPI-devel] checked in my code

[David B. <db...@du...>]

On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 05:42, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-03-03 at 22:31, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> > checked in a nice version of my code. everything seems to work well.
> > screwed up the changelog entry, unfortunatly, and forgot to include a
> > linebreak in it so it runs on... ah well.
> >=20
> > cvs update, i guess.
> >=20
> > everything seems to work well though, and sf has my ssh2 key. excellent=
.
> >=20
> > enjoy the rest of your weekend :)
>=20
> looks good :-), except for 2 major things...
>=20
eek these were both my suggestion to kyle, my bad.

> please revert the kbuild patch; this isn't the right thing...
> 1.) the kbuild patch should neither add a kernel suffix (I was tented
> myself long time ago; but this 1. would require to have such a patch for
> _every_ kernel version out there... and 2ndly it will break peoples
> custom kernels... so don't do it :-)
> 2.) the kbuild patch, as the name already says, should touch _only_
> makefiles and other build-related control files... so the loop.c patch
> doesn't belong in there for at least one reason; the other reason is,
> that people may prefer the loop-jari patch, and this would conflcit; so
> don't do this either..
> 3.) we can't claim something changed to be GPL'ed, if we don't have the
> copyright to do so... this could bring us into major legal problems...
is this in regards to "declaring" all of the module licenses GPL ?  In
which case should we be trying to hunt down all the original maintainers
of the code and asking them if we can GPL it ?
Dave