linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 1/6] LICENSES: Add the copyleft-next-0.3.1 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:   Wed, 25 May 2022 22:51:43 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Richard Fontana <fontana@...rpeleven.org>
Cc:     tj@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jeyu@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
        bvanassche@....org, dan.j.williams@...el.com, joe@...ches.com,
        keescook@...omium.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, minchan@...nel.org,
        linux-spdx@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Goldwyn Rodrigues <rgoldwyn@...e.com>,
        Kuno Woudt <kuno@...b.nl>,
        copyleft-next@...ts.fedorahosted.org,
        Ciaran Farrell <Ciaran.Farrell@...e.com>,
        Christopher De Nicolo <Christopher.DeNicolo@...e.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/6] LICENSES: Add the copyleft-next-0.3.1 license

On Wed, May 25 2022 at 09:57, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 11:22:36PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> This paragraph is not really understandable for Joe Developer.
>> 
>>   copyleft-next-0.3.1 is explicitly compatible with GPLv2 (or later) and
>>   can therefore be used for kernel code. Though the best and recommended
>>   practice is to express this in the SPDX license identifier by
>>   licensing the code under both licenses expressed by the OR operator.
>> 
>> Hmm?
>
> Let me try clarifying this further, how about:
>
>    copyleft-next-0.3.1 is explicitly compatible with GPLv2 (or later) and
>    can therefore be used for kernel code. Despite this, if you use
>    copyleft-next-0.3.1 on Linux, the recommended practice is to express
>    dual licensing with GPL using in the SPDX license identifiers by
>    using by the OR operator.

  'using in the ..' ?

and

  'by using by' is off by one 'by' :)

I'm not seeing how that clarifies stuff further. I might be biased, but
the version I suggested is crystal clear.

>> > +  To use the copyleft-next-0.3.1 license put the following SPDX tag/value
>> > +  pair into a comment according to the placement guidelines in the
>> > +  licensing rules documentation:
>> > +    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR copyleft-next-0.3.1
>> > +    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR copyleft-next 0.3.1
>> > +    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ OR copyleft-next-0.3.1
>> > +    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later OR copyleft-next-0.3.1
>> 
>> Please don't propagate the GPL-2.0 and GPL-2.0+ tags. They are
>> outdated (still valid) in the SPDX spec, which reminds me that I should
>> update the relevant documentation...
>
> OK thanks for the recommendation, I'll leave it at:
>
> +    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR copyleft-next-0.3.1

	SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR copyleft-next-0.3.1

please. See my previous reply quoted above.

> +    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later OR copyleft-next-0.3.1

Thanks,

        tglx