On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:19:05PM -0500, Li Yang wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > However, we can't dictate to people what license they wish to submit > > their work under; though, we can make the decision whether to accept > > it under the license terms or not. > > But I'm wondering if we submit a device tree patch using other GPL > compatible permissive license(like GPL/3-clause-BSD dual license) > which doesn't include any other device tree files, will it still be > acceptable or not? I don't see why it wouldn't be acceptable. The only thing that matters for Linux itself is that it's GPL v2 compatible since the kernel is a GPL v2 project. > > I think the problem will come if we try to mix a file that's licensed > > one way, which includes files licensed under a different set of > > licenses... if you want to use a file licensed under BSD 3-clause but > > don't want to agree to the GPL license (so you're only bound by the > > BSD 3-clause license) and that file includes some GPL/X11 licensed > > files, then what? > > Permissive licenses like X11 and BSD 3-clause should be compatible > with each other right? My point above is that you'd have to accept both X11 and BSD 3-clause in that situation, if you wanted to reject GPL. I don't wish to get into a discussion whether X11 and BSD 3-clause are mutually compatible with each other, that's lawyer territory. :) -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
