| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610031749540.9789@iabervon.org> Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 18:02:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@...ervon.org> To: Marc Perkel <marc@...kel.com> cc: "Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Maybe it's time to fork the GPL License - create the Linux license? On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Marc Perkel wrote: > Just a thought. Suppose we forked the GPL2 license and created the Linux > license? (Or some better name) It's kind of clear the Stallman has his own > ajenda and that it's not compatible with the Linux model. So - lets fork it an > start a new one. The GPLv2 isn't open source, so it can't (legally) be forked: Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed. (The "mere aggregation" clause is, in fact, very important, since otherwise it would be impossible to distribute GPLed code along with the license for it.) Now, it would be plausible to get Creative Commons to do a "provide source" clause, such that there would be an alternative text with the same effect as the GPLv2, if there was enough negative opinion about the FSF to justify having an alternative text to use for this effect. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists