linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] LICENSES: add and use copyleft-next-0.3.1

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:   Thu, 8 Jul 2021 15:01:58 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@....org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        rgoldwyn@...e.com, kuno@...b.nl, fontana@...rpeleven.org,
        Ciaran.Farrell@...e.com, Christopher.DeNicolo@...e.com, hch@....de,
        corbet@....net, linux@...mhuis.info, ast@...nel.org,
        andriin@...com, daniel@...earbox.net, atenart@...nel.org,
        alobakin@...me, weiwan@...gle.com, ap420073@...il.com,
        tj@...nel.org, jeyu@...nel.org, ngupta@...are.org,
        sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com, minchan@...nel.org,
        axboe@...nel.dk, mbenes@...e.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
        keescook@...omium.org, jikos@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        copyleft-next@...ts.fedorahosted.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] LICENSES: add and use copyleft-next-0.3.1

On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 10:52:54 -0700
"Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@....org> wrote:

> Joe Perches wrote:
> >>> You can ask but it's the submitter's choice to license their code however
> >>> they desire.  
> 
> … to which I'd add, as long as the license is GPLv2-only-compatible, which of
> course (GPLv2-only|copyleft-next) is.

I agree with Joe on this, but I have to ask; What happens when someone
makes a change to this file? The default kernel license is GPL-v2. Does this
change automatically become the same as the file itself, or is the new
change under the dual license?

I've made changes to code that had a dual license that wasn't GPL
compatible, and the company involved asked me to sign off on the other
license (which I did).

-- Steve