Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/9] drm/xen-front: Introduce Xen para-virtualized frontend driver | From | Oleksandr Andrushchenko <> | Date | Wed, 21 Feb 2018 12:25:18 +0200 |
| |
On 02/21/2018 12:19 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:42:23AM +0200, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >> On 02/21/2018 11:17 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 10:03:34AM +0200, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xen/xen_drm_front.c >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ >>>> +/* >>>> + * Xen para-virtual DRM device >>>> + * >>>> + * 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. >>>> + * >>>> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, >>>> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of >>>> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the >>>> + * GNU General Public License for more details. >>> Most Xen drivers in Linux use a dual GPL/BSD license, so that they can >>> be imported into other non GPL OSes: >>> >>> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or >>> modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 >>> as published by the Free Software Foundation; or, when distributed >>> separately from the Linux kernel or incorporated into other >>> software packages, subject to the following license: >>> >>> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy >>> of this source file (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without >>> restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, >>> merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, >>> and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to >>> the following conditions: >>> >>> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in >>> all copies or substantial portions of the Software. >>> >>> THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR >>> IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, >>> FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE >>> AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER >>> LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING >>> FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS >>> IN THE SOFTWARE. >>> >>> IMO it would be good to release this driver under the same license, so >>> it can be incorporated into other OSes. >> I am in any way expert in licensing, but the above seems to be >> /* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR MIT) */ >> At least this is what I see at [1] for MIT. >> Could you please tell which license(s) as listed at [1] >> would be appropriate for Xen drivers in terms of how it is >> expected to appear in the kernel code, e.g. expected >> SPDX-License-Identifier? > I would be fine with anything MIT/BSD-*/Apache-* like. In the Xen > community we have generally done dual GPL-2.0 MIT, so your proposed > tag looks fine IMO (I would also personally be fine with > MIT/BSD-*/Apache-* only). Ok, then I am about to use /* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR MIT) */ > > The point is that it would be good to have the code under a more > permissive license so it can be integrated into non GPL OSes in the > future if needed, and that your code could be used as a reference for > that. That is clear, no objections > Thanks, Roger. Thank you, Oleksandr
| |