linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] module: Clarify GPL-Compatible is OK

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 07 May 2012 12:09:43 +0930
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...jolero.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...jolero.org>,
	Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module: Clarify GPL-Compatible is OK

On Fri,  6 Apr 2012 17:11:22 -0700, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...jolero.org> wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...jolero.org>
> 
> While the kernel is GPLv2 individual files and modules have
> historically been allowed to be:
> 
>   * Dual BSD/GPL
>   * Dual MIT/GPL
>   * Dual MPL/GPL
> 
> This is done for several reasons but most importantly to be able to
> share between Linux and permissive licensed Operating Systems such
> as the BSDs.

1) It's always better to be explicit.
2) Changing any licencing mark on a file is a PITA, involving acks and
   lawyers.
3) I haven't yet been overwhelmed with the burden of maintaining licence
   strings.

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/