[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ehqwhfyo.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists