Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263162AbUCYOaC (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:30:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263173AbUCYOaB (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:30:01 -0500 Received: from islay.mach.uni-karlsruhe.de ([129.13.162.92]:53675 "EHLO mailout.schmorp.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263162AbUCYO1s (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:27:48 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 15:26:54 +0100 From: Marc Lehmann To: Nigel Cunningham , Pavel Machek Cc: Arjan van de Ven , Cameron Patrick , Michael Frank , Pavel Machek , Software Suspend - Mailing Lists , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [Swsusp-devel] lzf license Message-ID: <20040325142654.GA11633@schmorp.de> Mail-Followup-To: Nigel Cunningham , Pavel Machek , Arjan van de Ven , Cameron Patrick , Michael Frank , Pavel Machek , Software Suspend - Mailing Lists , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <20040322094053.GO16890@patrick.wattle.id.au> <1079948988.5296.8.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <20040322182121.GA21521@schmorp.de> <1080166848.2628.3.camel@calvin.wpcb.org.au> <20040325114736.GA300@elf.ucw.cz> <20040322094053.GO16890@patrick.wattle.id.au> <1079948988.5296.8.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <20040322182121.GA21521@schmorp.de> <1080166848.2628.3.camel@calvin.wpcb.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040325114736.GA300@elf.ucw.cz> <1080166848.2628.3.camel@calvin.wpcb.org.au> X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.6.4 (root@cerebro) (gcc version 3.3.3 20040125 (prerelease) (Debian)) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1856 Lines: 37 On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 10:20:48AM +1200, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > I'm not sure what the verdict is in the end. Do we need changes to the > license? If so, could you send me a patch, Marc? I have no idea. I made an offer on how to change the license, if that isn't ok, I'd like to hear. On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 12:47:37PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Linking BSD w/o advertising with kernel is okay, but it would taint > the kernel, and is bad idea w.r.t. patents, anyway. Dual BSD/GPL is > better way to go. Well, if there is any problem with relicensing the code as GPL, let me know. I offered to change the license to make this smoother, but lots of kernel code came from a bsd license and was relicensed before. If there are problems with that, I'd like to hear. I see no point in keeping the code out just because it isn't gpl, but I don't see a point in making the original distribution dual licensed for no reason. (and, as I said, there is lots of bsd-derived code in the kernel and I am _really_ keen on getting rid of any problems that forbid relicensing). I am now back from the cebit and much more responsive, btw. -- -----==- | ----==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@goof.com |e| -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | | - 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/