[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180423082635.GB20868@kroah.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 10:26:35 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 8/9] LICENSES: Add CC-BY-SA-4.0 license text
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 09:37:14AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 12:02:16AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Add the full text of the CC-BY-SA-4.0 license to the kernel tree. It was
> > > copied directly from:
> > >
> > > https://spdx.org/licenses/CC-BY-SA-4.0.html#licenseText
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> >
> > As we only have 1 user of this, do we really need it?
> >
> > Willy, it's your file, Documentation/core-api/idr.rst that is needing
> > this addition to the LICENSES directory. While I'm all for CC licenses
> > for Documentation, we don't seem to be very consistent with them.
> > Should this be the "default" license we choose for documentation for now
> > on?
>
> I'm all for it. If we can agree than this should move to preferred/ and not
> to other/
Ok, that sounds good, Jon? I know you have looked into picking a decent
license for documentation, any thoughts here?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists