LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	DOCUMENTATION <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@linaro.org>,
	Jonas Oberg <jonas@fsfe.org>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
	Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: LICENSES: Missing ISC text & possibly a category ("Not recommended" vs. "Preferred licenses")
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2018 12:15:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACna6rw0R7j9pkFnUKnJFcudoZ2n1r1Dig4xSpj+n7e9Qo129w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180429052617.GC24294@kroah.com>

On 29 April 2018 at 07:26, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 11:25:17PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> Due to some maintainers *preferring* BSD-compatible license for DTS
>> files [0], I was writing mine using ISC. I had no very special reason
>> for it: I was choosing between BSD-2-Clause, MIT and ISC. I've chosen
>> ISC as I read about its "removal of language deemed unnecessary".
>>
>> I took a moment to look at the new SPDX thing and noticed that:
>> 1) File license-rules.rst provides "LICENSES/other/ISC" as an example
>
> Yeah, bad example, we should fix that text up.  Care to send a patch? :)

Sure. I see that license-rules.rst also refers to LICENSES/other/ZLib
which also doesn't exist.

As "other" directory contains only GPL-1.0 and MPL-1.1 I guess one of
these should be referenced.


>> 2) License file LICENSES/other/ISC doesn't exist
>> 3) ISC is listed as an *example* under the "Not recommended licenses"
>
> Yes, please don't use it if at all possible.
>
>> First of all, as ISC is used by some files in the Linux kernel, I
>> think it's worth adding to the LICENSE/*/ISC.
>
> I see it is only used in a very small number of dts files.  Why not just
> use BSD-2-Clause instead?  What do you find in ISC that is not available
> to you with just BSD?

As said, I read about its "removal of language deemed unnecessary". I
assumed that the simpler license text the better.


>> Secondly, it isn't 100% clear to me if ISC is preferred or not
>> recommended. File license-rules.rst suggests the later by listing it
>> as an example for "Not recommended". It's just an example though, so
>> I'm not 100% sure without seeing it in either: "preferred" or "other"
>> directories. Also if anyone finds it "Not recommended", can we get a
>> short explanation why is it so, please?
>
> The license is functionally equalivant to BSD-2, so why would you want
> to add more complexity here and have two licenses that are the same be
> "recommended"?

I don't insist on it, I'm trying to figure out what's the best for the
Linux community.

On the other hand I could ask why do we want more complexity by having
MIT license. It's very similar to the BSD-2-Clause after all. AFAIK
the only minor differences are that:
1) MIT clearly allows sublicensing
2) BSD 2-Clause clearly requires distributing *binaries* with
copyrights + license text

-- 
Rafał

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-04-29 10:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-28 21:25 Rafał Miłecki
2018-04-29  5:26 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-04-29  7:03   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-04-29  7:31     ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-04-29 10:15   ` Rafał Miłecki [this message]
2018-04-30  0:09     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CACna6rw0R7j9pkFnUKnJFcudoZ2n1r1Dig4xSpj+n7e9Qo129w@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=zajec5@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=jonas@fsfe.org \
    --cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
    --cc=pombredanne@nexb.com \
    --cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=rob.herring@linaro.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linuxfoundation.org \
    --subject='Re: LICENSES: Missing ISC text & possibly a category ("Not recommended" vs. "Preferred licenses")' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).