Re: [Device-mainlining] [PATCH v2 2/3] gadget: Introduce the usb charger framework

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 07:04:05PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > > > * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> > > > * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > > 
> > > Please, keep it V2 or later, if you can. It makes sharing code with U-Boot (for
> > > example) easier.
> > > 
> > > There's long tradition of "V2 or later" code in the kernel.
> > 
> > And there's even longer "v2 only" tradition as well.  It's up to the
> > person / company submitting the code to pick the license for it, let
> > them make the decision please.
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> >> + *
> >> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> >> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> >> + * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> >> + * (at your option) any later version.
> >
> >I have to ask, do you really mean "any later version"?
> 
> Given that you are quite high-level maintainer, that does not sound exactly
> like "let them make the decision". It sounds like a pressure to change the
> license to the one you liked. WHy did you have to ask?

I have to "ask" because I need to ensure that people put thought into
the license they chose instead of blindly cut-and-pasting it from a
random web site.  Companies all have policies on what the license of the
kernel code they produce are, and by nicely asking new developers this
question, it ensures that they are picking the license in a thoughtful
manner.

If they pick v2 vs. v2+ is of no opinion of mine, either is just
wonderful.

thanks,

greg k-h