Re: Replace include/list.h with non-GPL implementation

[Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>]

On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 18:02:39 +0200,
Clemens Lang wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> the current implementation of include/list.h is taken from Linux 2.4.0
> and possibly licensed under GPL-2.0. If the implementation isn't
> trivial, this might make libasound a derivative work and extend the
> viral effect to clients of the library. See
>   http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2014-December/085261.html
>   http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2014-December/085262.html
>   http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2014-December/085325.html
>   http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2015-January/086754.html
> for previous discussion.
> 
> This patch series avoids this ambiguity by replacing the list
> implementation with a version I modified from Rusty Russell's
> MIT-licensed list at http://ccodearchive.net/info/list.html
> 
> The two patches replace the list implementation and adapt the alsa-lib
> code accordingly. They are intended to be squashed together when
> merging.
> 
> [PATCH 1/2] Replace list.h with MIT-licensed implementation
> [PATCH 2/2] Adapt to changes in the linked list API

Well, the linked-list macro is a trivial thing each beginner
programmer starts writing at school.  And, the API itself can't be an
issue.  That is, it'd be enough just rewriting the existing list.h
(e.g. renaming variables, shuffles the call order, rephrase the
comments) by ourselves without introducing a big piece of codes of
even a different license, IMO.

Thoughts?


thanks,

Takashi