[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120712152740.GB14792@thunk.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 11:27:40 -0400
From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>
Cc: Richard Fontana <fontana2012@...il.com>,
"Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@....org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] copyleft-next: embrace the Signed-off-by practice
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 05:44:49PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>
>
> The idea is taken from Linus Torvald's subsurface
> project [0] README file. The Signed-off-by is widely
> used in public projects and we stand to gain to make
> its usage more prevalent. The meaning of the
> Signed-off-by is borrowed from the Linux kernel's.
>
> [0] git://github.com/torvalds/subsurface.git
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>
I wonder why you're cc'ing the linux-kernel mailing list? I've
checked the copyleft-next clause, and the anti-Tivoization clauses,
which was one of the primary reasons articulated by many kernel
developers --- including Linus Torvalds --- for not using GPLv3, is
still in the Copyleft-next license.
My understanding of Richard Fontana's past public positions was that
he was supportive of that part of the GPLv3 license, and so I had
assumed the Copyleft-next effort would be irrelevant as far as the
Linux Kernel was concerned.
Even if I am wrong about that (and I would be delighted if the answer
was that one of the Copyright-next's goals was to resolve this barrier
of the kernel moving off of GPLv2), it still would seem to me to be
out of scope of the LKML.
Regards,
- Ted
--
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