Re: [PATCH glep] glep-0076: Remove kernel DCO use provision

Sam James <[email protected]> Mon, 22 Jun 2026 18:39:50 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.gentoo.devel
Organization	Gentoo
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Michał Górny <[email protected]> writes:

> On Mon, 2026-06-22 at 17:22 +0100, Sam James wrote:
>> Michał Górny <[email protected]> writes:
>> 
>> > Remove the provision that the kernel DCO can be used instead of the GCO.
>> > This provision has been never used.
>> 
>> The point of it was that having a bespoke GCO can be problematic for
>> contributors. That nobody has used it yet doesn't mean it won't help a
>> (likely corporate) contributor in future.
>> 
>
> I should probably have pointed out that as a followup I'd like to
> integrate at least some of our AI policy into GCO, so that a contributor
> signing off would also clarify that the contribution was made with "no
> assistance of ..."  Having a DCO fallback would then be a significant
> loophole.

Ah, that's useful background. I'm not sure still though: our AI policy
isn't only concerned with copyright (we care about quality and ethics too) and
having it spread in different places may not be a good thing. Do we need
to update the social contract too? ;)

We could perhaps have a non-normative note about the AI policy in there.

Changing GLEP 76 wrt AI likely only helps on the surface as we'd expect
people to follow policy either way. The only benefit I can see is
directing people to our AI policy which we can do with a non-normative
note.

Including the AI policy in our GCO somehow also poses questions about
say, importing Linux commits, I suppose, depending on how it would be done.

sam

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 418 B)