Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

[Daniel Hazelton]

On Sunday 10 June 2007 09:40:23 Alan Cox wrote:
> > But I think this is largely academic.  You only need a fairly small
> > number of fairly significant contributors to say "no" and the rest of
> > the process would be pointless.  And at last count, the number of
> > kernel people who were not keen on GPLv3 was fairly high.  Of course
> > no-one knows for certain yet what the final GPLv3 will be, and maybe
> > lots of people would change their mind when it comes out.
>
> You can take a fair bet someone will say no, or much more likely they or
> whoever inherited their copyright will say $50,000

I seeds shades of Merkey there :P

Seriously, though, this was all settled a long time ago. Linus said "While 
individual parts of the kernel *could* be licensed [with another license] the 
kernel as a whole is strictly GPLv2" (I've tried to get it right, but my 
memory isn't as good as it used to be when it comes to useful quotes like 
that)

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