From: sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com (Sebastian Hesselbarth)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: mvebu: dove: Relicense the device tree under GPLv2+/X11
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:35:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <553FB6B4.8020401@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150428155910.GD12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On 28.04.2015 17:59, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:09:04AM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> The current implicit GPL only licensing on the device tree makes it
>> very impractical for other software components licensed under another
>> license.
>>
>> In order to make it easier for them to reuse our device trees,
>> relicense our device trees under a GPL/X11 dual-license.
>>
[...]
>> so I decided to keep the whole relicensing in a single patch. Please send
>> your Acked-by's in reply to this patch if you are happy with the relicensing.
>
> I normally don't include the "or later version" for my license changes
> as I've only accepted to contribute under the terms of GPLv2.
Ok, I guess this is a NACK for GPLv2+ but an Acked-by if we limit the
GPL part to GPLv2 only?
If so, is everybody else who already Acked the GPLv2+ part also fine
with reducing the GPL version to "version 2 only" ?
Sebastian
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@free.fr>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mvebu: dove: Relicense the device tree under GPLv2+/X11
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:35:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <553FB6B4.8020401@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150428155910.GD12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On 28.04.2015 17:59, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:09:04AM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> The current implicit GPL only licensing on the device tree makes it
>> very impractical for other software components licensed under another
>> license.
>>
>> In order to make it easier for them to reuse our device trees,
>> relicense our device trees under a GPL/X11 dual-license.
>>
[...]
>> so I decided to keep the whole relicensing in a single patch. Please send
>> your Acked-by's in reply to this patch if you are happy with the relicensing.
>
> I normally don't include the "or later version" for my license changes
> as I've only accepted to contribute under the terms of GPLv2.
Ok, I guess this is a NACK for GPLv2+ but an Acked-by if we limit the
GPL part to GPLv2 only?
If so, is everybody else who already Acked the GPLv2+ part also fine
with reducing the GPL version to "version 2 only" ?
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-28 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-27 9:09 [PATCH] ARM: mvebu: dove: Relicense the device tree under GPLv2+/X11 Sebastian Hesselbarth
2015-04-27 9:09 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2015-04-27 11:31 ` Andrew Lunn
2015-04-27 11:31 ` Andrew Lunn
2015-04-27 12:03 ` Jason Cooper
2015-04-27 12:03 ` Jason Cooper
2015-04-27 13:33 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-04-27 13:33 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-04-27 16:24 ` Jean-Francois Moine
2015-04-27 16:24 ` Jean-Francois Moine
2015-04-28 15:59 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-04-28 15:59 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-04-28 16:35 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth [this message]
2015-04-28 16:35 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
2015-04-28 17:09 ` Jason Cooper
2015-04-28 17:09 ` Jason Cooper
2015-04-28 17:44 ` Jean-Francois Moine
2015-04-28 17:44 ` Jean-Francois Moine
2015-05-01 20:15 ` Andrew Lunn
2015-05-01 20:15 ` Andrew Lunn
2015-05-01 20:18 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-05-01 20:18 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2015-05-01 20:21 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-05-01 20:21 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=553FB6B4.8020401@gmail.com \
--to=sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.