Hi, Kristian! On May 05, Kristian Nielsen wrote:

Sergei Golubchik writes:

...

...

...

confirmation that we can take it under BSD-new or MCA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The question is not about relicensing GPLv2 patch under BSD. It's about getting any license at all.

So do I understand you correctly: The fact that the original request to the contributer asks for only BSD-new or MCA is an oversight? And all contributers should read this and similar requests as a request for granting either BSD, MCA, _or_ GPLv2 rights to patches, at the contributer's choice?

No, I did not say that. BSD-new is, indeed, preferred, because it's a more open license and the ecosystem benefits from it. For example, Oracle can take any patch that was published under BSD, even if it was contributed to MariaDB. But Oracle cannot use patches, that were published under GPLv2. So, indeed, the standard request is "please contribute under MCA or BSD-new". But this is unrelated to the contribution that we're talking about. It was neither under MCA, nor under BSD, nor under GPLv2. It was under OCA. Which does not give us right to use it. Was it under GPLv2, that would've been enough. Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security@mariadb.org

On 5 May 2016, at 22:33, Sergei Golubchik wrote:

...

...

...

...

confirmation that we can take it under BSD-new or MCA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The question is not about relicensing GPLv2 patch under BSD. It's about getting any license at all.

So do I understand you correctly: The fact that the original request to the contributer asks for only BSD-new or MCA is an oversight? And all contributers should read this and similar requests as a request for granting either BSD, MCA, _or_ GPLv2 rights to patches, at the contributer's choice?

No, I did not say that. BSD-new is, indeed, preferred, because it's a more open license and the ecosystem benefits from it. For example, Oracle can take any patch that was published under BSD, even if it was contributed to MariaDB. But Oracle cannot use patches, that were published under GPLv2.

The reality is that, does Oracle ever take patches today from MariaDB Server? I’m going to say that more or less this does not happen, which means that the official messaging should now be: Please contribute your patches under GPLv2, BSD-new or sign the MCA if you choose to

So, indeed, the standard request is "please contribute under MCA or BSD-new".

But this is unrelated to the contribution that we're talking about. It was neither under MCA, nor under BSD, nor under GPLv2. It was under OCA. Which does not give us right to use it. Was it under GPLv2, that would've been enough.

Of course, in this particular case, the OCA is how it was contributed and there is no point arguing about it, but the MariaDB Server should be able to accept under GPLv2/BSD-new While we are on this topic, why are we asking for copyright assignment under the MCA today? From the FAQ: https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/mariadb-contributor-agreement-frequently-a... in case we have forgotten the original reasons…. -- Colin Charles, http://bytebot.net/blog/ twitter: @bytebot | skype: colincharles "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mohandas Gandhi