[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C1FA141.30006@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 10:28:33 -0700
From: Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@...eaurora.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Gregory Bean <gbean@...eaurora.org>,
dwalker@...eaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] msm: Add gpio register address mapping information.
Alan Cox wrote:
>>> Yeah. Either this can be replaced with GPL, and it such case just do
>>> so, or it can not, and then it can not be applied to kernel.
>>>
>> This is a standard BSD-style license so it's compatible w/ the GPL. Thanks.
>
> The kernel requires GPL, and its much much easier for everyone to state
> so explicitly to avoid future surprises (remember 4 clause BSD was once
> thought GPL compatible even by the FSF...)
>
> If you want to make it clear it's also available BSD licensed in this
> form (at least until someone changes it) see the wording in files like
> drivers/char/random.c
>
> That usually keeps all the lawyers happy.
>
> Alan
Keeping the lawyers happy certainly has it's challenges. Is it uncommon
to use just a BSD-style license for headers? I understand that everyone
would prefer just GPL. I'm primarily curious about preserving BSD
licensing for headers under /include. A dual license would work, but
would it also be frowned upon to use just a 3-clause BSD license like we
have in this patch? Thanks.
- Bryan
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
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