Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 23:03:22 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
To: debian developer <debiandev@gmail.com>
Cc: Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@netone.net.tr>, "david@lang.hm" <david@lang.hm>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
Message-ID: <20070610220322.GG21478@ftp.linux.org.uk>
References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <18026.16739.228277.938421@notabene.brown> <20070609071231.GL2649@lug-owl.de> <466BB9B0.5030908@netone.net.tr> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706100150080.6675@asgard.lang.hm> <466BCBBC.90305@netone.net.tr> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706100301520.6675@asgard.lang.hm> <f24d23310706100355j3af7e12fq2e0e345402e48ca2@mail.gmail.com> <466C0901.4000405@netone.net.tr> <f24d23310706101222y6fb527cckf1d0f7ba78aa3254@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f24d23310706101222y6fb527cckf1d0f7ba78aa3254@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 918
Lines: 17

On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 12:52:41AM +0530, debian developer wrote:

> I don't think that upgrading to GPLv3 just for the sake of tools
> present in some other software should be the reason. We are capable
> enough of developing our own tools, and many experienced people are
> working on equivalent(etx4 etc.,) and much sophisticated tools for the
> linux kernel.

I don't think that switch to GPLv3 can be described as upgrade.  I certainly
have no intention to do that to my code; some of it I might release under BSD
license, and that can be used in any project.  The rest of the kernel stuff
I've done (and that's the majority of my contributions) is under GPLv2 *only*.
-
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/