From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: Proposed ACPI Licensing change Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 04:58:27 -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Message-ID: <3DF1C643.5070900@pobox.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: To: "Grover, Andrew" Cc: acpi-devel-pyega4qmqnRoyOMFzWx49A@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Grover, Andrew wrote: > In order to solve this, we are considering releasing the Linux version of > the interpreter under a dual license. This would allow direct incorporation > of changes. Any patches submitted against the ACPI core code would > implicitly be allowed to be used by us in a non-GPL context. This is already > done elsewhere in the Linux kernel source by the PCMCIA code, for example. I think this is great. Since pcmcia already set an example with their license, I think it's a great model to follow. I also echo other comments to choose an already-known license like the MPL or BSD (etc.) so that lawyers don't have extra work ;-) Jeff