From: Detlev Zundel <dzu@denx.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] u-boot-v2 and GPL license version?
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:21:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2r5wqayqb.fsf@ohwell.denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A54E1C8.5010808@ge.com> (Jerry Van Baren's message of "Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:13:28 -0400")
Hi Jerry,
> Kumar Gala wrote:
>> Sascha,
>>
>> You seem to be the person acting as maintainer of u-boot-v2. Do you
>> have any input if u-boot-v2 would stay with GPLv2 or move to GPLv3?
>>
>> - k
>
> U-Boot v2 is the usage case I had in mind in my question:
>> Would U-Boot be willing to have as much GPLv2++ (GPLv3) as possible, and
>> supporting a run time plug-in system to accommodate GPLv2-only modules?
> <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/61801/focus=62886>
>
> RMS' opinion was that this approach could be taken WRT GPLv3 of the
> U-Boot core and allow GPLv2 plug-ins, preferably via an explicit
> exception. He was also OK with the concept from an ethical point of view.
> <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/61801/focus=62920>
Don't forget that RMS also noted that this case also needs the exception
on the GPLv2 only code to be used in conjunction with GPLv3.
> If we took that approach, it would probably allow TiVoisation - maybe we
> could craft the GPLv3 s/w to prevent add-on modules from TiVoing the
> whole, but I think that would be difficult... if GPLv2 modules are added
> and initialized at start up time, it would be pretty hard to prevent a
> TiVo module from locking down the whole.
>
> Since the primary point of going to GPLv3 is anti-TiVoism and the
> primary (only?) argument against going to GPLv3 is to allow TiVoism,
> from that point of view the GPLv3/GPLv2-plugin combination is a failure.[1]
Indeed.
> Wolfgang's last word was pretty adamant about taking U-Boot to GPLv3. I
> see the U-Boot v2 GPLv3/GPLv2-plugin technique as a way to take the core
> to GPLv3 without "needlessly" re-writing the parts we've borrowed from
> linux (in fact, it encourages borrowing from linux, which is a Good
> Thing[tm]).
Asking Linux authors to license their code as GPLv2+ is also an option.
Incidentally drivers/rtc-bfin.c is one example of "GPL-2 or later" in
the Linux tree.
Cheers
Detlev
--
The only use I can find for vi is editing the emacs sources while
porting them to a new machine.
-- Larry Campbell
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-40 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: dzu at denx.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-09 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-08 17:48 [U-Boot] u-boot-v2 and GPL license version? Kumar Gala
2009-07-08 18:13 ` Jerry Van Baren
2009-07-09 11:21 ` Detlev Zundel [this message]
2009-07-09 11:35 ` Jerry Van Baren
2009-07-09 15:29 ` Mike Frysinger
2009-07-08 19:01 ` Mike Frysinger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m2r5wqayqb.fsf@ohwell.denx.de \
--to=dzu@denx.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox