Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0

[Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com>]

On 06/29/2007 12:48 AM, Alan Cox wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 00:00:27 +0200
> Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 06/28/2007 06:30 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>>> Public domain is GPL compatible.
>> Would you happen to have an opinion on the attached? I don't so much need it 
> 
> The answer is "NO!!!!"
> 
> Public domain also means "I don't have to give you the source".
> If its merged with the kernel the resulting work is GPL anyway
> 
>> Stating that code which one intends to be in the public domain has "GPL and 
>> additional rights" is a bit of a travesty though.
> 
> Indeed if its public domain you may have almost no rights at all
> depending what you were given. Once you get the source code you can do
> stuff but I don't have to give you that. If its public domain I can find
> security holes in it, and refuse to provide the fixed module in source
> form even.
> 
> (And public domain is a pretty 'brave' choice of licence as in many
> countries it does not imply any of the no warranty stuf the GPL does).
> 
> So essentially, if its public domain and you put a copy in the kernel GPL
> the kernel copy. It doesn't mean the PD version ceased to be PD. If you
> want to keep it PD then also ask that anyone contributing to the GPL
> version also sends you a PD version of any changes. (They may not but
> then right now they dont have to anyway)

Great answer. Thanks very much for the information.

Rene.