From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42965 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1752128AbeD2HbE (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 29 Apr 2018 03:31:04 -0400
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 07:31:01 +0000
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: LICENSES: Missing ISC text & possibly a category ("Not
 recommended" vs. "Preferred licenses")
Message-ID: <20180429073101.GD27875@wotan.suse.de>
References: <CACna6rz_Ms2Uv1P6E0gCGNsRwK4nm=PMAOaJ5Uk9aJxs2VSamQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180429052617.GC24294@kroah.com>
 <20180429070315.GC27875@wotan.suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180429070315.GC27875@wotan.suse.de>
Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-xfs.vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: xfs
To: =?utf-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <zajec5@gmail.com>, One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, DOCUMENTATION <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linuxfoundation.org>, Kate Stewart <kate@linuxfoundation.org>, Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@linaro.org>, Jonas Oberg <jonas@fsfe.org>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>, mcgrof@kernel.org

On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 07:03:15AM +0000, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 07:26:17AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > I see it is only used in a very small number of dts files.  Why not just
> > use BSD-2-Clause instead?  What do you find in ISC that is not available
> > to you with just BSD?
> 
> ISC license is a simplified version of the BSD license due to the Berne
> convention. It was also used for wireless drivers to help the BSD community in
> particular OpenBSD who had picked that license for new contributions claimed
> simplification of the BSD-2-Clause. Because of this reason many BSD communities
> feel super comfortable with picking up kernel code in Linux under this license.
> 
> Granted, I'm on no longer a fan of promoting permissive licenses as it didn't
> buy us cross-collaboration at all. We tried.
> 
> But it would be unfair to advice against a license unless a reason is stated in
> favor of another BSD license. Why is the ISC license worse than the
> BSD-2-Clause?

Here's a good 'ol discussed reason as to why to prefer the 2-clause BSD
I suppose, and also to consider dual licensing actually:

http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120408155709.1c817f1f@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk

So essentially tested over time, runtime considerations, and whatever the FSF
decides today may change tomorrow. So best to be safe. The dual licensing
strategy also helps with "unanticipated incompatibility".

  Luis