Re: [PATCH v2] module: Clarify usage of MODULE_LICENSE()

[Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>]

On Sun,  8 Apr 2012 09:46:28 -0700, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@frijolero.org> wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@frijolero.org>
> 
> While the kernel is GPLv2 individual the MODULE_LICENSE() has allowed for
> these tag to be used:
> 
>   * Dual BSD/GPL
>   * Dual MIT/GPL
>   * Dual MPL/GPL
> 
> This is done for historical reasons, namely questioning the compatibilty
> between the GPL and some old BSD licenses. Some developers and maintainers
> tend to use assume the macro is also used to help clarify if the module
> source code could be shared with the BSD family, but that is not the
> case.

Incorrect.  When the author clarifies their license it *does* help.  If
a tag and license text were to disagree, it would muddy the waters.

> The MODULE_LICENSE() declares the module's license at run time and even for
> the dual tags the run time license that applies is the GPL.

You're probably correct, but it's very hard to care.

> If sharing share between Linux and permissive licensed Operating Systems such
> as the BSDs is desired developers should review the license on the top of
> each file being considered to be shared.

Of course.  But having both is nice and clear.

Cheers,
Rusty.