[www] r329507 - add the draft developer policy patch, as was proposed on Aug 7 2017 on llvm-dev.
Chris Lattner via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Sat Apr 7 10:34:29 PDT 2018
Author: lattner
Date: Sat Apr 7 10:34:29 2018
New Revision: 329507
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=329507&view=rev
Log:
add the draft developer policy patch, as was proposed on Aug 7 2017 on llvm-dev.
Added:
www/trunk/foundation/relicensing/devpolicy.patch
Added: www/trunk/foundation/relicensing/devpolicy.patch
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/www/trunk/foundation/relicensing/devpolicy.patch?rev=329507&view=auto
==============================================================================
--- www/trunk/foundation/relicensing/devpolicy.patch (added)
+++ www/trunk/foundation/relicensing/devpolicy.patch Sat Apr 7 10:34:29 2018
@@ -0,0 +1,318 @@
+Index: DeveloperPolicy.rst
+===================================================================
+--- DeveloperPolicy.rst (revision 308891)
++++ DeveloperPolicy.rst (working copy)
+@@ -117,8 +117,8 @@
+ program.
+
+ When submitting patches, please do not add confidentiality or non-disclosure
+-notices to the patches themselves. These notices conflict with the `LLVM
+-License`_ and may result in your contribution being excluded.
++notices to the patches themselves. These notices conflict with the LLVM
++licensing terms and may result in your contribution being excluded.
+
+ .. _code review:
+
+@@ -644,44 +644,226 @@
+ .. note::
+
+ This section deals with legal matters but does not provide legal advice. We
+- are not lawyers --- please seek legal counsel from an attorney.
++ are not lawyers --- please seek legal counsel from a licensed attorney.
+
+ This section addresses the issues of copyright, license and patents for the LLVM
+-project. The copyright for the code is held by the individual contributors of
+-the code and the terms of its license to LLVM users and developers is the
+-`University of Illinois/NCSA Open Source License
+-<http://www.opensource.org/licenses/UoI-NCSA.php>`_ (with portions dual licensed
+-under the `MIT License <http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php>`_,
+-see below). As contributor to the LLVM project, you agree to allow any
+-contributions to the project to licensed under these terms.
++project. The copyright for the code is held by the contributors of
++the code. The code is licensed under permissive `open source licensing terms`_,
++namely the Apache 2 license, which includes a copyright and `patent license`_.
++When you contribute code to the LLVM project, you license it under these terms.
+
++If you have questions or comments about these topics, please contact the
++`LLVM Developer's Mailing List <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>`_. However,
++please realize that most compiler developers are not lawyers, and therefore you
++will not be getting official legal advice.
++
+ Copyright
+ ---------
+
+-The LLVM project does not require copyright assignments, which means that the
+-copyright for the code in the project is held by its respective contributors who
+-have each agreed to release their contributed code under the terms of the `LLVM
+-License`_.
++The LLVM project does not collect copyright assignments, which means that the
++copyright for the code in the project is held by the respective contributors.
++Because you (or your company)
++retain ownership of the code you contribute, you know it may only be used under
++the terms of the open source license you contributed it under: the license for
++your contributions cannot be changed in the future without your approval.
+
+-An implication of this is that the LLVM license is unlikely to ever change:
+-changing it would require tracking down all the contributors to LLVM and getting
+-them to agree that a license change is acceptable for their contribution. Since
+-there are no plans to change the license, this is not a cause for concern.
++Because the LLVM project does not require copyright assignments, changing the
++LLVM license requires tracking down the
++contributors to LLVM and getting them to agree that a license change is
++acceptable for their contributions. We feel that a high burden for relicensing
++is good for the project, because contributors do not have to fear that their
++code will be used in a way with which they disagree.
+
+-As a contributor to the project, this means that you (or your company) retain
+-ownership of the code you contribute, that it cannot be used in a way that
+-contradicts the license (which is a liberal BSD-style license), and that the
+-license for your contributions won't change without your approval in the
+-future.
++Relicensing
++-----------
+
+-.. _LLVM License:
++The last paragraph notwithstanding, the LLVM Project is in the middle of a large
++effort to change licenses, which aims to solve several problems:
+
+-License
++* The old licenses made it difficult to move code from (e.g.) the compiler to
++ runtime libraries, because runtime libraries used a different license from the
++ rest of the compiler.
++* Some contributions were not submitted to LLVM due to concerns that
++ the patent grant required by the project was overly broad.
++* The patent grant was unique to the LLVM Project, not written by a lawyer, and
++ was difficult to determine what was protection was provided (if any).
++
++The scope of relicensing is all code that is considered part of the LLVM
++project, including the main LLVM repository, runtime libraries (compiler_rt,
++OpenMP, etc), Polly, and all other subprojects. There are a few exceptions:
++
++* Code imported from other projects (e.g. Google Test, Autoconf, etc) will
++ remain as it is. This code isn't developed as part of the LLVM project, it
++ is used by LLVM.
++* Some subprojects are impractical or uninteresting to relicense (e.g. llvm-gcc
++ and dragonegg). These will be split off from the LLVM project (e.g. to
++ separate Github projects), allowing interested people to continue their
++ development elsewhere.
++
++To relicense LLVM, we will be seeking approval from all of the copyright holders
++of code in the repository, or potentially remove/rewrite code if we cannot.
++This is a large
++and challenging project which will take a significant amount of time to
++complete. In the interim, **all contributions to the project will be made under
++the terms of both the new license and the legacy license scheme** (each of which
++is described below). The exception to this is the legacy patent grant, which
++will not be required for new contributions.
++
++When all of the code in the project has been converted to the new license or
++removed, we will drop the requirement to contribute under the legacy license.
++This will achieve the goal of having
++a single standardized license for the entire codebase.
++
++If you are a prior contributor to LLVM and have not done so already, please do
++*TODO* to allow us to use your code. *Add a link to a separate page here, which
++is probably a click through web form or something like that. Details to be
++determined later*.
++
++
++.. _open source licensing terms:
++
++New LLVM Project License Framework
++----------------------------------
++
++Contributions to LLVM are licensed under the `Apache License, Version 2.0
++<https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>`_, with two limited
++exceptions intended to ensure that LLVM is very permissively licensed.
++Collectively, the name of this license is "Apache 2.0 License with LLVM
++exceptions". The exceptions read:
++
++::
++
++ ---- LLVM Exceptions to the Apache 2.0 License ----
++
++ As an exception, if, as a result of your compiling your source code, portions
++ of this Software are embedded into an Object form of such source code, you
++ may redistribute such embedded portions in such Object form without complying
++ with the conditions of Sections 4(a), 4(b) and 4(d) of the License.
++
++ In addition, if you combine or link compiled forms of this Software with
++ software that is licensed under the GPLv2 ("Combined Software") and if a
++ court of competent jurisdiction determines that the patent provision (Section
++ 3), the indemnity provision (Section 9) or other Section of the License
++ conflicts with the conditions of the GPLv2, you may retroactively and
++ prospectively choose to deem waived or otherwise exclude such Section(s) of
++ the License, but only in their entirety and only with respect to the Combined
++ Software.
++
++
++We intend to keep LLVM perpetually open source and available under a permissive
++license - this fosters the widest adoption of LLVM by
++**allowing commercial products to be derived from LLVM** with few restrictions
++and without a requirement for making any derived works also open source. In
++particular, LLVM's license is not a "copyleft" license like the GPL.
++
++The "Apache 2.0 License with LLVM exceptions" allows you to:
++
++* freely download and use LLVM (in whole or in part) for personal, internal, or
++ commercial purposes.
++* include LLVM in packages or distributions you create.
++* combine LLVM with code licensed under every other major open source
++ license (including BSD, MIT, GPLv2, GPLv3...).
++* make changes to LLVM code without being required to contribute it back
++ to the project - contributions are appreciated though!
++
++However, it imposes these limitations on you:
++
++* You must retain the copyright notice if you redistribute LLVM: You cannot
++ strip the copyright headers off or replace them with your own.
++* Binaries that include LLVM must reproduce the copyright notice (e.g. in an
++ included README file or in an "About" box), unless the LLVM code was added as
++ a by-product of compilation. For example, if an LLVM runtime library like
++ compiler_rt or libc++ was automatically included into your application by the
++ compiler, you do not need to attribute it.
++* You can't use our names to promote your products (LLVM derived or not) -
++ though you can make truthful statements about your use of the LLVM code,
++ without implying our sponsorship.
++* There's no warranty on LLVM at all.
++
++We want LLVM code to be widely used, and believe that this provides a model that
++is great for contributors and users of the project. For more information about
++the Apache 2.0 License, please see the `Apache License FAQ
++<http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html>`_, maintained by the
++Apache Project.
++
++
++.. note::
++
++ The LLVM Project includes some really old subprojects (dragonegg,
++ llvm-gcc-4.0, and llvm-gcc-4.2), which are licensed under **GPL
++ licenses**. This code is not actively maintained - it does not even
++ build successfully. This code is cleanly separated into distinct SVN
++ repositories from the rest of LLVM, and the LICENSE.txt files specifically
++ indicate that they contain GPL code. When LLVM transitions from SVN to Git,
++ we plan to drop these code bases from the new repository structure.
++
++
++.. _patent license:
++
++Patents
+ -------
+
+-We intend to keep LLVM perpetually open source and to use a liberal open source
+-license. **As a contributor to the project, you agree that any contributions be
+-licensed under the terms of the corresponding subproject.** All of the code in
++Section 3 of the Apache 2.0 license is a patent grant under which
++contributors of code to the project contribute the rights to use any of
++their patents that would otherwise be infringed by that code contribution
++(protecting uses of that code). Further, the patent grant is revoked
++from anyone who files a patent lawsuit about code in LLVM - this protects the
++community by providing a "patent commons" for the code base and reducing the
++odds of patent lawsuits in general.
++
++The license specifically scopes which patents are included with code
++contributions. To help explain this, the `Apache License FAQ
++<http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html>`_ explains this scope using
++some questions and answers, which we reproduce here for your convenience (for
++reference, the "ASF" is the Apache Software Foundation, the guidance still
++holds though)::
++
++ Q1: If I own a patent and contribute to a Work, and, at the time my
++ contribution is included in that Work, none of my patent's claims are subject
++ to Apache's Grant of Patent License, is there a way any of those claims would
++ later become subject to the Grant of Patent License solely due to subsequent
++ contributions by other parties who are not licensees of that patent.
++
++ A1: No.
++
++ Q2: If at any time after my contribution, I am able to license other patent
++ claims that would have been subject to Apache's Grant of Patent License if
++ they were licenseable by me at the time of my contribution, do those other
++ claims become subject to the Grant of Patent License?
++
++ A2: Yes.
++
++ Q3: If I own or control a licensable patent and contribute code to a specific
++ Apache product, which of my patent claims are subject to Apache's Grant of
++ Patent License?
++
++ A3: The only patent claims that are licensed to the ASF are those you own or
++ have the right to license that read on your contribution or on the
++ combination of your contribution with the specific Apache product to which
++ you contributed as it existed at the time of your contribution. No additional
++ patent claims become licensed as a result of subsequent combinations of your
++ contribution with any other software. Note, however, that licensable patent
++ claims include those that you acquire in the future, as long as they read on
++ your original contribution as made at the original time. Once a patent claim
++ is subject to Apache's Grant of Patent License, it is licensed under the
++ terms of that Grant to the ASF and to recipients of any software distributed
++ by the ASF for any Apache software product whatsoever.
++
++
++Legacy License Structure
++------------------------
++
++.. note::
++ The code base was previously licensed under the Terms described here.
++ We are in the middle of relicensing to a new approach (described above), but
++ until this effort is complete, the code is also still available under these
++ terms. Once we finish the relicensing project, new versions of the code will
++ not be available under these terms. However, nothing takes away your right
++ to use old versions under the licensing terms under which they were
++ originally released.
++
++We intend to keep LLVM perpetually open source and to use a permissive open
++source license. The code in
+ LLVM is available under the `University of Illinois/NCSA Open Source License
+ <http://www.opensource.org/licenses/UoI-NCSA.php>`_, which boils down to
+ this:
+@@ -689,13 +871,13 @@
+ * You can freely distribute LLVM.
+ * You must retain the copyright notice if you redistribute LLVM.
+ * Binaries derived from LLVM must reproduce the copyright notice (e.g. in an
+- included readme file).
++ included README file).
+ * You can't use our names to promote your LLVM derived products.
+ * There's no warranty on LLVM at all.
+
+ We believe this fosters the widest adoption of LLVM because it **allows
+ commercial products to be derived from LLVM** with few restrictions and without
+-a requirement for making any derived works also open source (i.e. LLVM's
++a requirement for making any derived works also open source (i.e. LLVM's
+ license is not a "copyleft" license like the GPL). We suggest that you read the
+ `License <http://www.opensource.org/licenses/UoI-NCSA.php>`_ if further
+ clarification is needed.
+@@ -714,33 +896,3 @@
+ cannot be moved from the LLVM core to libc++ without the copyright owner's
+ permission.
+
+-Note that the LLVM Project does distribute dragonegg, **which is
+-GPL.** This means that anything "linked" into dragonegg must itself be compatible
+-with the GPL, and must be releasable under the terms of the GPL. This implies
+-that **any code linked into dragonegg and distributed to others may be subject to
+-the viral aspects of the GPL** (for example, a proprietary code generator linked
+-into dragonegg must be made available under the GPL). This is not a problem for
+-code already distributed under a more liberal license (like the UIUC license),
+-and GPL-containing subprojects are kept in separate SVN repositories whose
+-LICENSE.txt files specifically indicate that they contain GPL code.
+-
+-We have no plans to change the license of LLVM. If you have questions or
+-comments about the license, please contact the `LLVM Developer's Mailing
+-List <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>`_.
+-
+-Patents
+--------
+-
+-To the best of our knowledge, LLVM does not infringe on any patents (we have
+-actually removed code from LLVM in the past that was found to infringe). Having
+-code in LLVM that infringes on patents would violate an important goal of the
+-project by making it hard or impossible to reuse the code for arbitrary purposes
+-(including commercial use).
+-
+-When contributing code, we expect contributors to notify us of any potential for
+-patent-related trouble with their changes (including from third parties). If
+-you or your employer own the rights to a patent and would like to contribute
+-code to LLVM that relies on it, we require that the copyright owner sign an
+-agreement that allows any other user of LLVM to freely use your patent. Please
+-contact the `LLVM Foundation Board of Directors <mailto:board at llvm.org>`_ for more
+-details.
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list