From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8094EC433E7 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 23:03:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 644C02071B for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 23:03:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726204AbgHaXD2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 19:03:28 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:63036 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725941AbgHaXD2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Aug 2020 19:03:28 -0400 IronPort-SDR: LYNVkYdKY02CNwWRnQm6P1NBpKDMpksrP8NzQWNybgfl8gIm+VVgfVMutKoARg4rghU46x0xE2 dwkiFwvEC5mg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9730"; a="157075818" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.76,376,1592895600"; d="scan'208";a="157075818" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Aug 2020 16:03:24 -0700 IronPort-SDR: FSNiuSSh9FuGEJ16qFFsUm2ORfPKLQEB6matnKwAl6obtcwJBijUWuhlwguFkebssPeLEw16E6 ZQkxqOgvCv2Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.76,376,1592895600"; d="scan'208";a="502016400" Received: from hrandhaw-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO hanvin-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com) ([10.212.244.158]) by fmsmga005-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Aug 2020 16:03:23 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] Documentation: clarify driver licensing rules To: Dave Hansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: dan.j.williams@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, corbet@lwn.net, linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org References: <20200814145625.8B708079@viggo.jf.intel.com> From: "H. Peter Anvin" Message-ID: <1a4de696-2409-8de5-db77-9c5a21a762e0@intel.com> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:03:22 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200814145625.8B708079@viggo.jf.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020-08-14 07:56, Dave Hansen wrote: > > From: Dave Hansen > > Greg has challenged some recent driver submitters on their license > choices. He was correct to do so, as the choices in these instances > did not always advance the aims of the submitters. > > But, this left submitters (and the folks who help them pick licenses) > a bit confused. They have read things like > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst which says: > > individual source files can have a different license > which is required to be compatible with the GPL-2.0 > > and Documentation/process/submitting-drivers.rst: > > We don't insist on any kind of exclusive GPL licensing, > and if you wish ... you may well wish to release under > multiple licenses. > > As written, these appear a _bit_ more laissez faire than we've been in > practice lately. It sounds like we at least expect submitters to make > a well-reasoned license choice and to explain their rationale. It does > not appear that we blindly accept anything that is simply > GPLv2-compatible. > > Drivers appear to be the most acute source of misunderstanding, so fix > the driver documentation first. Update it to clarify expectations. > Well written! Retroactive Ack from me :) -hpa