linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] LICENSES: Add the CC-BY-4.0 license

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:   Tue, 24 Nov 2020 10:36:58 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] LICENSES: Add the CC-BY-4.0 license

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 10:31:33AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Am 24.11.20 um 10:18 schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:00:01AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> For context: Patch 2 of this series adds a text to the Documentation/ directory
>>> which (for now) uses "GPL-2.0+ OR CC-BY-4.0", as I want to make it easy and
>>> attractive for others to base their work on it. I'm not strongly attached to
>>> CC-BY-4.0, but it seemed like the best choice: it's designed for such usage and
>>> afaics better than using MIT for text files.
>>
>> And you've not Cced me on that patch 2 or patch 3, which makes Ccing
>> me on this pretty useless as I can't judge the context.
>
> Argh, sorry, slipped through. You can find it here:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/2f314e58cb14c1579f843f8c72bdb4bbb83ac20a.1606137108.git.linux@leemhuis.info/
>
> FWIW, here it is for easy access (just sent with thunderbird instead of
> git send-mail, hopefully should be enough for this):

So what is so special with this documentation that it needs a
(for the kernel tree) unusual license?  How to we make sure people
don't accidentally end up including things they can't?