copyleft-next June 2022

copyleft-next@lists.fedorahosted.org

1 participants
2 discussions

Re: [PATCH v9 1/6] LICENSES: Add the copyleft-next-0.3.1 license
by Luis Chamberlain 02 Jun '22

02 Jun '22

On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 08:20:18AM +0200, gregkh(a)linuxfoundation.org wrote: > On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 04:11:16AM +0000, Bird, Tim wrote: > > I don't think that the Linux kernel should be used for license promotion, but if it is, > > then it should be used to promote GPL-v2-only. > > I agree, and in a way, I feel like that is what is happening here for > this original submission. See below for more... I have been using copyleft-next for years and cross polination for me is real. > I agree, dual licensed code that is added to the kernel is either done: > - because the original code had a non-GPL license and it was > added so that it could be compatible so that it could be added > to Linux. > - because the code being accepted into Linux can also be used in > another non-Linux codebase now or in the future. Sometimes such cross polination is purely speculative, but we don't stop and ask people for evidence of this. You forgot that another reason is because some attorneys like some permissive license more. That's it. The Clear BSD license is an example. In that case it was a new license to Linux. So let us be clear that one could argue that was a bit of license promotion. > The submission here was neither of these. You are incorrect. I have a vision for Linux kernel testing and I have put *years* of effort in this regard and thinking about architecture behind all this. So yes cross polination is *extremely* important to me and hence some of this effort. Luis

1 0

Re: [PATCH v9 1/6] LICENSES: Add the copyleft-next-0.3.1 license
by Luis Chamberlain 02 Jun '22

02 Jun '22

On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 04:11:16AM +0000, Bird, Tim wrote: > I don't think that the Linux kernel should be used for license promotion, but if it is, > then it should be used to promote GPL-v2-only. I already *used* copyleft-next on Linux on a dual licensed manner, the patches in question are about using SPDX to simpllify things and adaopt the SPDX annotations. And, to re-iterate once more, I'm using copyeft-next as that is *my* license of choice for *any* new software projects I use and I want to enable cross prolination between them. I have been doing this since I wrote CRDA many years ago. I have many reasons for using copyleft-next and I've listed many of the reasons why a free software developer would care to enable this cross polination but yet again you seem to be disregarding all that. This is similar to how 2-cluase BSD is compatible with the GPL and is used for cross polination to BSDs even though in practice a lot of that cross polination may not happen. There are practical uses here and I've been using this license for years now and I have no intention on stopping. Luis

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

copyleft-next June 2022