[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201201144314.GA14256@lst.de>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:43:14 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
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 Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 07:51:37AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> We could also, if we saw fit, take the position that anything that has
> been processed through the docs build is a derived product of the kernel
> and must be GPL-licensed - any dual-licensing would be stripped by that
> act. That, too, should address this concern, I think.
>
> In general I'd rather see fewer licenses in Documentation/ than more. But
> Thorsten has put a lot of effort into this work; if he wants to
> dual-license it in this way, my inclination is to accommodate him. But
> that requires getting CC-BY-4.0 accepted into the LICENSES directory.
> (That said, I believe it should go into LICENSES/dual/ rather than
> preferred/).
I agree with everything said above.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists