From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271224AbTGWTRV (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2003 15:17:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271233AbTGWTPM (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2003 15:15:12 -0400 Received: from crosslink-village-512-1.bc.nu ([81.2.110.254]:19452 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271229AbTGWTPB (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2003 15:15:01 -0400 Subject: Re: Promise SATA driver GPL'd From: Alan Cox To: Andre Hedrick Cc: Martin Diehl , Adrian Bunk , "Adam J. Richter" , andersen@codepoet.org, jgarzik@pobox.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1058987946.5516.117.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 23 Jul 2003 20:19:06 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mer, 2003-07-23 at 20:08, Andre Hedrick wrote: > GPL provides no means to enable the author/copyright holder to defend and > recover legal fees occurred during discovery and litigation. I don't think anyone says the GPL is a perfect license > What I find odd in you politics which stinks, is you and redhat are > pumping OSL into new features which are not generally submitted to the > standard base. I do not care, but it does look funny. Red Hat is using OSL for various new projects based on the fact that lawyers and legal scholars think that the OSL is the better license to be using and that it achieves desired goals for free software. The kernel however is GPL and its kind of hard to change that. Certainly Red Hat can't do that. OSL wasn't around when the kernel began or my guess is Linus would have gone that way to avoid political baggage.