From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id kKivHAmhh2fW5g8AWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:50:33 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 734531E100; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:50:33 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 174B31E08E for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:50:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13CB385E00A for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 11:50:32 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A13CB385E00A Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (gnu.wildebeest.org [45.83.234.184]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26A2C3858CD1 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 11:49:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 26A2C3858CD1 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 26A2C3858CD1 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=45.83.234.184 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1736941778; cv=none; b=bwEA0T50k2wfViIvvXTjHa1voKg3MT5tEXgc95dhlMHLDOCKt4pE7p1D53jXGBkjOVCnA6y+pHBmY4ujKdWTvFarH9b0521S76YS4imAhnJiPTCHVa/6j+bQupRX74YjlcGYgZdLfeh4G4hLPmlcQMm7FDqjwPKypwHW+vIfBlA= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1736941778; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Da9l+jCUI6rg4cDCBKB0GR/m9TDr+eT46pNxgqV5/70=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=QgAYjBGE6LnuIohE0lUgOidYvcXE2LwxCBnx10F5i/gpWADeq/WQ+Rgk0nY+aOtfB6Vo9CKNwOdL8wyfFIjPBXJcyQg19fWKpvoYwFNZl6HuMkZaxiHvI2M5dXuhukkw8PA0Xd4QUpsbSUkWokOCkB128smgc10yiVeS+VRmRXA= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 26A2C3858CD1 Received: by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4453D3032F85; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:49:37 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:49:37 +0100 From: Mark Wielaard To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Simon Marchi , luis.machado@arm.com, aburgess@redhat.com, tom@tromey.com, blarsen@redhat.com, pinskia@gmail.com, gdb@sourceware.org, pedro@palves.net, nickc@redhat.com, "Bradley M. Kuhn" , zoe@fsf.org, ksiewicz@fsf.org Subject: Re: DCO: Was: Re: Contributing to gdb Message-ID: <20250115114937.GC25056@gnu.wildebeest.org> References: <86538dac-6c3a-4b9e-9de9-3906e645fa4d@redhat.com> <87y16vwbzl.fsf@tromey.com> <74c8b867-f5bb-48f7-9849-11d06e63a3d7@arm.com> <87tta2r5z2.fsf@redhat.com> <00ba936a-6aa9-4d1d-8b1a-b5459b696289@arm.com> <7ac6e62d-1969-41b9-be3f-a2f70344a3eb@simark.ca> <4ec99ea7-fc48-49ed-a75a-a5a06370d6ad@arm.com> <5505f680-159b-450c-adac-c5e5f3e5a98c@simark.ca> <86a5bttkh8.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86a5bttkh8.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" Hi Eli, On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 06:42:59PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii via Gdb wrote: > As long as we are only considering good-faith mistakes, not deliberate > lies about the authorship and copyright rights, the difference between > CA and DCO is that with the former, one is _required_ to provide a > disclaimer from the employer (if that is relevant; it isn't always), > so this aspect is pretty much in the face of the contributor. By > contrast, with DCOs one is just asked to declare that he/she has the > rights to contribute the code. So people might, by omission, make the > mistake of not obtaining the employer's agreement, perhaps because > they are not aware of these aspects, or forget, or... One thing we could do to make it easier for people contributing work for their employer is follow what the Samba does for their DCO [1]. Someone wishing to contribute work under the DCO simply first sends a copy of the whole DCO from their corporate email address declaring they have permission to contribute to Samba from their employer under the indicated licenses to a special "contributing" email address. The Samba project then keeps a copy of that email as a record that the submitter has the rights to contribute code. We could ask the FSF copyright-clerk to do that for us. After the copyright-clerk receives that declaration people are then fine to submit Signed-off-by patches from their employers email address. It doesn't prevent all mistakes, but at least makes clear that if you contribute on behave of your company you have to check you have the rights. And the explicit email has the added benefit that we can show we had a company disclaimer on file. Cheers, Mark [1] https://www.samba.org/samba/devel/copyright-policy.html