Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1242570 > unrolled thread

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

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [Device-mainlining] [PATCH v2 2/3] gadget: Introduce the usb  charger framework Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2015-10-08 18:00 +0200
    Re: [Device-mainlining] [PATCH v2 2/3] gadget: Introduce the usb  charger framework Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2015-10-08 18:50 +0200
      Re: [Device-mainlining] [PATCH v2 2/3] gadget: Introduce the usb  charger framework Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2015-10-08 19:10 +0200
        Re: [Device-mainlining] [PATCH v2 2/3] gadget: Introduce the usb  charger framework Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2015-10-08 19:20 +0200

#1242570 — Re: [Device-mainlining] [PATCH v2 2/3] gadget: Introduce the usb charger framework

Hi!

> On 08/16/2015 08:03 PM, Baolin Wang via device-mainlining wrote:
> > On 14 August 2015 at 23:27, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 05:47:45PM +0800, Baolin Wang 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"?
> >>
> > 
> > I think I did not get your point, could you explain it detailedly?
> 
> The full kernel is licensed under v2 of the GPL only, not "any later version".
> See the second paragraph at the top of the COPYING file in the root directory
> of the kernel source tree. There are differences on individual files, but
> having this file allow "any later version" makes it different from much of
> rest of the kernel.
> 
> Unless you have a specific reason to allow greater-than-V2 GPL licensing on this
> file, you should change the licensing clause.  The following wording appears
> to be pretty popular:
> 
> * 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.

Best regards,
									Pavel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1242593

On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 05:50:31PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > On 08/16/2015 08:03 PM, Baolin Wang via device-mainlining wrote:
> > > On 14 August 2015 at 23:27, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > >> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 05:47:45PM +0800, Baolin Wang 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"?
> > >>
> > > 
> > > I think I did not get your point, could you explain it detailedly?
> > 
> > The full kernel is licensed under v2 of the GPL only, not "any later version".
> > See the second paragraph at the top of the COPYING file in the root directory
> > of the kernel source tree. There are differences on individual files, but
> > having this file allow "any later version" makes it different from much of
> > rest of the kernel.
> > 
> > Unless you have a specific reason to allow greater-than-V2 GPL licensing on this
> > file, you should change the licensing clause.  The following wording appears
> > to be pretty popular:
> > 
> > * 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.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1242617

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?

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1242622

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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web