[openib-general] Re: [PATCH 05/16] IB uverbs: core implementation

[Tom Duffy]

On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 17:27 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> Ok, I've complained about this before, but due to the fact that you are
> calling EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() only functions in this code, the ability for
> it for someone to use the BSD license on it in the future, is pretty
> much impossible, right?

No, only to call these functions from BSD-only (or other licensed)
modules.

> Wasn't the openib group going to drop this horrible license, or are they
> still insisting on porting this to other operating systems?

I don't think we need to drop this license.  What is the harm?

At some point, Sun may want OpenSolaris to use OpenIB.  Or what if the
Darwin folks decide to create a port?

Don't worry: the OpenIB Windows work is done in a completely different
repository with a completely different code base because Microsoft was
scared of code that ever *was* GPL, even if a BSD-only fork was created.

The bylaws of OpenIB.org require that all code hosted and developed
under our auspices be (at least) BSD.  I don't want it to happen, but if
the code in Linux chooses one license (GPL) and not both, then we won't
be able to accept patches back that come in through the mainline kernel.

-tduffy
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20050628/68848138/attachment.sig>