On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 02:46:40PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:

Op 31 jul. 2012, om 13:26 heeft Richard Purdie [off-list ref] het volgende geschreven:

quoted

On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 21:01 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:

quoted

* original recipe added by RP in fc128ab1e4fec27d44cebfa690a9bc233eda0caf was saying GPL
* later it was changed to GPLv2
* COPYING.GPL was added to reflect that
* meta-oe has similar recipe with MIT license and even more scripts, so lets change LICENSE here too

Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <redacted>
---
meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-extraconf/COPYING.GPL |  339 ---------------------
meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-extraconf_1.0.bb      |    8 +-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 343 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/udev/udev-extraconf/COPYING.GPL

Er, I think we need to be a little more careful than this. Just because
you want something to be so, doesn't make it happen just like that...

Looking at the commit, I've just copied the license from the original
source which was a GPLv2 recipe (udev). Where did mount.blacklist come
from originally? Is there evidence its MIT licensed? How did meta-oe
conclude this was MIT licensed?

It was written for oe-classic -> MIT licensed

ping4, are some lawyers still working on this?

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com