From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: License Questions Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 23:18:32 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <1189144403.7105.13.camel@localhost> <46E13EE8.5050508@codethink.co.uk> <20070907205429.236670@gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:39092 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753965AbXIGWSk (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2007 18:18:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070907205429.236670@gmx.net> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Mathias Hasselmann Cc: Rob Taylor , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Mathias Hasselmann wrote: > > Yup, out of all GPL incompatible licenses choosing OSL 1.1 probably was > the worst one Linus could choose. Maybe this stupid licensing choice > explains why this pretty code which sparse is doesn't get the attention > it deserves... :-( Yeah, the OSL wasn't the best choice. I tried to change it (look in the sparse email archives) a few years ago, but I never got in contact with anybody at Transmeta back then who could have the power to relicense, and while my work with Linux has always been unquestionably mine (ie my work contract explicitly stated such), with sparse it isn't as obvious.. So back then, I couldn't get anybody to look at it (not that I tried all that hard), and I don't think I even have any contacts left to people I know at Transmeta any more. Linus