Messages in this thread | | | From | Dave Airlie <> | Date | Sat, 21 Oct 2023 05:30:41 +1000 | Subject | Re: Dual licensing [was: [PATCH 2/5] misc: mlx5ctl: Add mlx5ctl misc driver] |
| |
On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 at 07:51, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote: > > Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> writes: > > > For your new files, please make them single license. If you insist on > > dual licensing them, I will insist on have a lawyer sign off on them so > > that they understand the issues involved with dual licenses, and just > > how much I hate them in the kernel tree as they are a pain over time. > > Out of curiosity, is there somewhere people can look for a description > of these issues and the pain they cause? I've seen this go by enough > times to think that it would be good to set down in Documentation/ > somewhere for future reference.
I'm also very curious, I've never had any issues in 15+ years with the dual licensed code in the DRM, and continue to prefer it.
Greg if you get new advice that you want to apply to the kernel as a whole, you probably need to write it up for us to discuss, your lawyers are not my lawyers etc.
Maybe something for Maintainers summit?
Dave.
| |