On TechRepublic: The 5 worst tech products of 2009
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

By Mike Ricciuti
Posted on ZDNet News: May 24, 2004 3:06:00 PM

Open Source Development Labs, which promotes adoption of Linux, said Monday it is putting in place a new system to better track and document changes to the operating system's kernel.

The group, which employs Linux creator Linus Torvalds, said the new system will require that contributions to the Linux kernel only be made by developers who agree to submit code under "appropriate" open-source licenses.


Get Up to Speed on...
Open source
Get the latest headlines and
company-specific news in our
expanded GUTS section.


The system puts in place an agreement called the Developer's Certificate of Origin, or DCO. The DCO will ensure that acknowledgement is given to developers for contributions and derivative works, and to those contributors who "receive submissions and pass them, unchanged, up the kernel tree," according to the open-source group.

The DCO is intended to eliminate questions and legal battles over the origin of Linux code contributions. Last year, the SCO Group, which owns a disputed amount of Unix intellectual property, sued IBM, alleging that the company violated its Unix contract by moving Unix technology to Linux that it should have kept secret.

The new system won't help answer questions about code already included in Linux. But it will help with future releases, said Stuart Cohen, the open-source group's chief executive. "Obviously, it's only on code submitted today going forward. But you can expect it will have a major effect on the 2.7 release (of the Linux kernel) coming out next." That release is "probably a year away," Cohen said.

The SCO-IBM case has ballooned into a far-ranging attack on Linux, attracting legal attention from Linux companies Novell and Red Hat and the ire of Linux supporters worldwide. SCO has also brought suit against several big companies that use Linux.

The SCO suit wasn't the sole reason for the move, Cohen said. "As Linux becomes more mainstream, and more companies and governments are involved in Linux," he said, "there are certain things that they would like to see as part of the documentation, as part of the process. The SCO lawsuit is what it is, and this really has no effect on that. We see that as more of a P.R. exercise."

On the subject of SCO, Torvalds wrote in a message sent Sunday to an Internet mailing list that "they've apparently made a couple of outlandish claims about where our source code comes from, including claiming to own code that was clearly written by me over a decade ago."

Torvalds added in the message, which was sent to a general Linux discussion group: "People have been pretty good (understatement of the year) at debunking those claims, but the fact is that part of that debunking involved searching kernel mailing list archives from 1992, etc. Not much fun. So, to avoid these kinds of issues 10 years from now, I'm suggesting that we put in more of a process to explicitly document not only where a patch comes from...but the path it came through."

The Open Source Development Labs' new system could help eliminate future battles over Linux code origin. The group said that under the DCO, all contributors to a particular submission are called upon to "sign off" on it before it may be considered for inclusion in the kernel.

Andrew Morton, who, along with Torvalds, maintains the current Linux 2.6 kernel, endorsed the new system after gaining support for it from other key Linux contributors, the open-source group said.

"We've always had transparency, peer review, pride and personal responsibility behind our open-source development method. With the DCO, we're trying to document the process. We want to make it simpler to link submitted code to its contributors. It's like signing your own work," Torvalds said in a statement.

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 64 Talkback(s)
So how is this different from the proprietary world?
The way developers float around these days this is just a risk of the occupation. Any developer working for MS or any other big software company is at risk of pulling illicit code from memory and sof... (Read the rest)
Posted by: George Mitchell Posted on: 05/25/04 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
I thought this was already done???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
Why bother complaining?  Jeff Spicoli | 05/24/04
Replace your reading glasses Jeff.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
I'll defend No Axe on this one  Michael Kelly | 05/24/04
Yes but..  Jeff Spicoli | 05/24/04
yes but...  ShadeTree | 05/24/04
No, it doesn't Bit  Jeff Spicoli | 05/24/04
Alpha not Beta  ShadeTree | 05/24/04
Jeff, are simply jealous?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
Nothing to say Jeff? Big surprise... NOT!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
Jeff, you really are confused.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
Draw some air in btwn. yer double posting..try letting me respond first  Jeff Spicoli | 05/24/04
So you openly admit to being a thief  ShadeTree | 05/24/04
Yes Bit -- that must have you and mommy running scared  Jeff Spicoli | 05/24/04
Last resort when losing... Call names.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
Buwahahaha  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
Well Itty  Jeff Spicoli | 05/24/04
Quite honestly...  Michael Kelly | 05/24/04
Didn't anybody READ the article?  George Mitchell | 05/24/04
re: Didn't anybody READ the article?  Iain_Peters | 05/24/04
Planting the seeds for an open future.  Xunil_Sierutuf | 05/24/04
Extra protection  Tim Patterson | 05/24/04
That smell is illegal in much of the world.  Anton Philidor | 05/24/04
Taking responsibility for Linux  Anton Philidor | 05/24/04
Good post (first few lines) ... but  George Mitchell | 05/24/04
More agreement than you might think  Anton Philidor | 05/24/04
I will take the first few lines.  doe_z | 05/24/04
That's disappointing.  Anton Philidor | 05/24/04
I like it better this way.  doe_z | 05/24/04
Exaggerating  Anton Philidor | 05/24/04
Views are not too far apart.  doe_z | 05/24/04
Could you summary?  doe_z | 05/24/04
Real Estate, Manufacturing, and Publishing  Yagotta B. Kidding | 05/24/04
Remember Judge Motz's injunction on Java?  Anton Philidor | 05/24/04
Still don't get publishing, eh?  Yagotta B. Kidding | 05/24/04
Software as speech?  Anton Philidor | 05/24/04
Not quite connecting?  IT_User | 05/24/04
Specifics vs generalities  Anton Philidor | 05/25/04
I cant be the only one  zijiang | 05/24/04
What a mess, no rules, no guidelines until now?  Enterprise Analyst | 05/24/04
You didn't read the article either!  George Mitchell | 05/24/04
The system was broken  Enterprise Analyst | 05/24/04
You can't like yourself then  Iain_Peters | 05/24/04
13 year long pet college project  nucrash | 05/24/04
You mean...  Fred Fredrickson | 05/24/04
look a new troll  ryusen | 05/24/04
Let the lawsuits begin  Enterprise Analyst | 05/24/04
Aw, come on now.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
Ax, say hello to the new D A E M O N  Monkey_MCSE | 05/24/04
:o)  Iain_Peters | 05/24/04
You are making a fool of yourself ...  George Mitchell | 05/24/04
The monkey is on you  Enterprise Analyst | 05/24/04
No, you accomplished it all on your own  IT_User | 05/24/04
Unreal nerve to do this...  Mike Cox | 05/24/04
kind of a rush job?  ryusen | 05/24/04
Going out on a limb?  IT_User | 05/24/04
Sign of the Times  ShadeTree | 05/24/04
What will it mean to the Linux developer?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
I'd think so  Michael Kelly | 05/24/04
Why stop there?  Yagotta B. Kidding | 05/24/04
Read the agreement, what does it say?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/24/04
Don't see how it is different from before?  doe_z | 05/24/04
Aw, but you can no longer plead ignorance.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/25/04
So how is this different from the proprietary world?  George Mitchell | 05/25/04

What do you think?

advertisement
advertisement
Click Here

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here