Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752171AbbEAUWG (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2015 16:22:06 -0400 Received: from down.free-electrons.com ([37.187.137.238]:52936 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750902AbbEAUWF (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2015 16:22:05 -0400 Message-ID: <5543DFB3.6040407@free-electrons.com> Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 17:18:59 -0300 From: Ezequiel Garcia User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sebastian Hesselbarth , Russell King - ARM Linux CC: Jason Cooper , Andrew Lunn , Jean-Francois Moine , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mvebu: dove: Relicense the device tree under GPLv2+/X11 References: <1430125744-3550-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <20150428155910.GD12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <553FB6B4.8020401@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <553FB6B4.8020401@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1473 Lines: 39 On 04/28/2015 01:35 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 28.04.2015 17:59, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:09:04AM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: >>> The current implicit GPL only licensing on the device tree makes it >>> very impractical for other software components licensed under another >>> license. >>> >>> In order to make it easier for them to reuse our device trees, >>> relicense our device trees under a GPL/X11 dual-license. >>> > [...] >>> so I decided to keep the whole relicensing in a single patch. Please >>> send >>> your Acked-by's in reply to this patch if you are happy with the >>> relicensing. >> >> I normally don't include the "or later version" for my license changes >> as I've only accepted to contribute under the terms of GPLv2. > > Ok, I guess this is a NACK for GPLv2+ but an Acked-by if we limit the > GPL part to GPLv2 only? > > If so, is everybody else who already Acked the GPLv2+ part also fine > with reducing the GPL version to "version 2 only" ? > Yeah, I'm fine with this. Acked-by: Ezequiel Garcia -- Ezequiel Garc?a, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/