linux-kernel - Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3a0f49600706171014m6bc9af34s9dda0ea282a4d63@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 17 Jun 2007 19:14:03 +0200
From:	"Gabor Czigola" <czigola@...il.com>
To:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

Hello!

I didn't follow the whole thread from the beginning, but I see that
there are pros and cons for both versions of GPL.

I wonder why the linux kernel development community couldn't propose
an own GPL draft (say v2.2) that is "as free as v2" and that includes
some ideas (from v3) that are considered as good (free, innovative, in
the spirit of whatever etc.) by the majority of the kernel developers.

I guess to have an own version of the GPL license could also help to
resolve (future) dual-licensing problems.

Gabor Czigola
-
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/