> Gerard Roudier wrote:
> > Each project have had _valuable_ reasons to choose their license. We must
> > try to respect that decision each time it is possible.
> > The BSD projects are very embarassed with softwares they are interested in
> > and that are refused to be moved to BSD style license by the original
> > authors.
> > Even if I respect any kind of author's decision, incorporating without
> > restraints BSD softwares into the Linux kernel for the reasons this does
> > not affect the GPLed softwares looks like unfairness to me.
>
> If it really matters to you, you can always dual-license the code, and
> let downstream developers pick which license they find most suitable.
Dual-licensing the code and leaving to forked developpements the choice of
the license (dual being candidate) is not very different, in my opinion,
as using the license suggested (or required for BSD) for each O/S,
regarding fairness about porting BSD code to Linux and vice-versa. It just
makes the Linux version more free that the Linux project actually would
want it to be, and may-be it is quite equivalent for BSD projects.
If Linus is ok with such dual-licensing then this can only be fine for me
too. :) I just prefer simplest schemes when it is possible.
(Btw, some part of the aic7xxx driver have been so dual-licenced by Justin
Gibbs, for example, IIRC)
Gérard.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/