This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 06/12/2018 12:03 PM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
On 06/12/2018 03:12 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:For a company, usually someone who has authorization to negotiate and sign contracts has to do this, not individual patch authors.In this case, I think we can still accept the patch because the number of lines changes is small (10 lines), but we'd need it for the next patch.I am ambivalent about the legal significance since although the number of lines of the change is small it could be argued as being a significant feature addition given that it chooses optimal routines for a specific processor core and implicitly provides information about the Phecda microarchitecture. As such, it is borderline newsworthy, speaking of which, maybe it needs a NEWS entry like so:* Improved string routine performance for the Aarch64 HXT Phecda core.
To be clear, I did not comment on the significance of the patch (legal or otherwise). I just repeated the rules used by the FSF used to determine if copyright assignment
| A change of just a few lines (less than 15 or so) is not legally | significant for copyright. <https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Legally-Significant.html>I think we all agree that the size of the patch has little to do with how much work went into it and how much impact it will have on users. 8-)
Thanks, Florian
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |