This has been pretty interesting for me to watch as I distribute my isp driver under a dual license (at least the portions of it which are common with the *BSD and Solaris ports) that is almost identical to Sam's verbiage. I'll admit that I hadn't thought about whether redistribution included the ability to modify the header (and thus the text of the licensing as I had written) or not. On balance I'd say I believe that the arguments for, on redistribution, picking one or the other license makes sense and honored my general intent. This allows people who modify the code (and presumably improve it) a "chef's choice" based on where they're serving the meal. IANAL, but I believe that none of this keeps me from continuing to put a dual license on stuff I leave up for distribution, or changing that to restricting the code to Martian Triathalon winners or what have you. -
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| david | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| David Woodhouse | [PATCH 1/3] firmware: allow firmware files to be built into kernel image |
| Peter Zijlstra | [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8 |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Josip Rodin | bnx2_poll panicking kernel |
| Patrick McHardy | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
