Re: filing patches upstream (legal)

[Tobias Nygren <tnn%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Mon, 4 May 2015 13:35:55 +0200
Niclas Rosenvik <nros%NetBSD.org@localhost> wrote:

> Hi everyone. I have filed patches from x11/qt5-qtbase that I am the
> creator of to the qt project. I would like to send other patches from
> this package upstream. The problem is that they aren't mine and I don't
> want to breach any copyright on these patches.
> QT has a cla[1] where one licenses the contributed code to the qt
> project.

This is similar to the usual git signed-off-by approach.

> What do the creators of these patches think about sending their
> patches upstream? (I hope they read this list)
> Some of them are just "defined(__NetBSD__)" here and there.
> From a copyright perspective, is it okay for me to send these patches
> upstream?

If the upstream license is GPL, then the patches must implicitly be GPL
too or we would be distributing encumbered binaries since we don't
set RESTRICTED on qt5-qtbase. Thus I think we can safely assume that
the patches are contributed under GPL.

IMHO in general all patches in pkgsrc should be suitable for upstreaming
according to upstream's chosen license unless explicitly noted
otherwise. In practice most upstream projects either explicitly or
implicitly follow the contribution requirements of the Linux kernel.

If we were to formalize anything, this is the way to go if we want
to be legally compatible with most upstream projects. When I submit
pkgsrc patches upstream I have always assumed DCO 1.1 (c) conditions
apply.

Read more here:

https://ltsi.linuxfoundation.org/developers/signed-process

-Tobias