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

Message-ID: <20120407002723.GA14568@kroah.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2012 17:27:23 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...jolero.org>
Cc:	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module: Clarify GPL-Compatible is OK

On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 05:11:22PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez 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.
> 
> You do not need to make dual licenses when licenses are compatible
> with each other, and in fact at times this can confuse developers / legal.
> This has been well documented by SFLC through their "Maintaining
> Permissive-Licensed Files in a GPL-Licensed Project: Guidelines for
> Developers" [0] which was inspired by the ambiguity of the MadWifi
> Project's Dual BSD/GPL license tradition. The list of GPL-Compatible
> licenses can be found on the FSF's website [1].
> 
> Lets help move out of the stone age and instead of extending this list
> with more permissive licenses add a simple "GPL-Compatible" tag for use by
> any GPL-Compatible licensed module. Given that vendors tend to grep existing
> drivers for what they do also change all drivers to use the simple tag but
> leave in place the old checks in case external drivers are using this. Moving
> forward GPL-Compatible modules should rely on this simple new tag instead
> of using the old tags or looking to add a new GPL-Compatible text descring
> that license.
> 
> [0] http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html
> [1] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
> 
> Cc: Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>
> Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
> Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
> Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
> Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...jolero.org>


Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

--
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/