From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267212AbUH0SlR (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:41:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266917AbUH0Sjq (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:39:46 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:40074 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267193AbUH0SjV (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:39:21 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:38:31 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Craig Milo Rogers Cc: Linus Torvalds , akpm@osdl.org, linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BK PATCH] USB patches for 2.6.9-rc1 Message-ID: <20040827183831.GA1715@kroah.com> References: <20040826235241.GA22295@kroah.com> <20040827033709.GC1284@isi.edu> <20040827183004.GB24018@isi.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040827183004.GB24018@isi.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:30:04AM -0700, Craig Milo Rogers wrote: > On 04.08.26, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Craig Milo Rogers wrote: > > > > > On 04.08.26, Greg KH wrote: > > > > Greg Kroah-Hartman: > > > > o USB: rip out the whole pwc driver as the author wishes to have done > > > > o USB: rip the pwc decompressor hooks out of the kernel, as they are a GPL violation > > > > > > The decompressor hooks may be a Linux kernel policy violation, > > > but I challenge your contention that they are a GPL violation. > > > > Doesn't matter. Whether they are a GPL violation is a gray area. They were > > removed because of a policy. The author then complained, and the _driver_ > > was removed for that reason. > > > > At no point was it a legal argument. In fact, since none of the people > > involved were layers, you shouldn't even try to _make_ it a legal > > arguments. > > Thank you, Linus, for making my point to Greg more clearly > than I did. Saying that the pwc decompressor hooks were removed "as > they are a GPL violation" is a difficult statement to support, and > brings up unresolved legal issues -- exactly what I tried to say. I'm > pleased you've clarified this issue for Greg and the rest of us. > > In concordance with Linus' policy statement above, Greg, could > you change your patch attribution to say something like "per kernel > policy", please? If for no other reason than to reduce dissention > among future lkml archive delvers about why the pwc removal took > place? :-) Hm, I can't do that anymore, as Linus has accepted it into his tree already. If he feels it's a big issue, he can edit it there. thanks, greg k-h