[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160123145438.GB9393@citrix.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 14:54:38 +0000
From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
"open list:XEN NETWORK BACKEND DRIVER" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Boris Ostrovsky" <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] xen-netback: fix license ident used in
MODULE_LICENSE
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 08:25:21PM +0000, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > The fact what include/linux/license.h:license_is_gpl_compatible includes
> > "Dual MIT/GPL" as an option seems to suggest that it is enough of a thing
> > to be validly used as the contents of a MODULE_LICENSE() thing.
>
> Yes. The MIT licence most definitely exists, and people know what it
> means.
>
> Also nobody should be changing the licence on anything unless they have
> the written permission of all rights holders on record, so it's best to
> leave it be 8)
>
I knew from the beginning anything related to license will be fun. :-)
In this particular case, I don't think I need to get confirmation from
all rights holder because they've agreed to the licenses listed in
the comment. I'm merely fixing a bug in code.
I understand people have different opinion on how this should be
interpreted. And I'm not a lawyer. Let's just leave it be now and divert
our energy to more useful things in life.
Wei.
> Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists