Re: [copyleft-next] Re: Kernel modules under new copyleft licence : (was Re: [PATCH v2] module.h: add copyleft-next >= 0.3.1 as GPL compatible)

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 07:05:18PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > >> Alright, this makes sense.
> > >>
> > >> As noted though there are a few "or" clauses, which upstream file
> > >> is a good template to use for copyleft-next ?
> > >
> > > There seems to be a few "or" clauses. For instance:
> > >
> > > a) you can pick either license [0]
> > > b) gpl on Linux, otherwise this other license below [1]
> > >
> > > To help uplift copyleft will go with b).
> > >
> > > [0] drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/driver.c
> > > [1] drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c
> > 
> > So that yields:
> > 
> >  * 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; or, when distributed separately from the Linux kernel or
> >  * incorporated into other software packages, subject to the
> 
> You have more )s there than (s.

Thanks just removed that pesky )

> Can you get rid of the "when distributed separately from the Linux
> kernel or incorporated into other software packages," wording? I'm not
> exactly sure what it is trying to say, and if it limits the license
> below in any way.

I had to pick an "or language" used already upstream and which folks were OK
with, this was one and I went with it. I prefer it as it makes it clear the
intent is outside of Linux I wish copyleft-next to apply.

  Luis