linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/26] Make reporting-bugs easier to grasp and yet more detailed & helpful

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]

Date:   Fri, 20 Nov 2020 14:59:30 -0700
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/26] Make reporting-bugs easier to grasp and
 yet more detailed & helpful

On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:29:51 +0100
Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info> wrote:

> >   - Dual licensed CC-SA-4.0 is fine with me.  CC-BY is OK if you really
> >     want to do it that way.    
> 
> I'm unsure and would appreciate options from others here.
> 
> Here are some of my thoughts about this:
> 
> What do we loose by dual-licensing it under a liberal license like 
> CC-BY? It afaics makes it a lot more attractive for websites or books 
> authors to use this text as a base, as they don't need to fear that 
> "share alike" or the GPL might have consequences on the surroundings. 
> I'd say that's a good thing for the kernel, as it increases the chances 
> the texts built upon ours remain close to what we expect on this topic.
> 
> That's why I currently think using CC-BY is a good idea.

It's a matter of preferences; I like -SA better as a closer match to the
kernel's GPL licensing.  But it's your text, so it's your choice.

jon