From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761810AbXFJWDg (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Jun 2007 18:03:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755112AbXFJWD1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Jun 2007 18:03:27 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:48863 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754661AbXFJWD1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Jun 2007 18:03:27 -0400 Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 23:03:22 +0100 From: Al Viro To: debian developer Cc: Tarkan Erimer , "david@lang.hm" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Message-ID: <20070610220322.GG21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <18026.16739.228277.938421@notabene.brown> <20070609071231.GL2649@lug-owl.de> <466BB9B0.5030908@netone.net.tr> <466BCBBC.90305@netone.net.tr> <466C0901.4000405@netone.net.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 12:52:41AM +0530, debian developer wrote: > I don't think that upgrading to GPLv3 just for the sake of tools > present in some other software should be the reason. We are capable > enough of developing our own tools, and many experienced people are > working on equivalent(etx4 etc.,) and much sophisticated tools for the > linux kernel. I don't think that switch to GPLv3 can be described as upgrade. I certainly have no intention to do that to my code; some of it I might release under BSD license, and that can be used in any project. The rest of the kernel stuff I've done (and that's the majority of my contributions) is under GPLv2 *only*.