From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757790Ab2GLRsv (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:48:51 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:50224 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755379Ab2GLRst (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:48:49 -0400 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" To: Richard Fontana Cc: "Bradley M. Kuhn" , tytso@mit.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: [PATCH v2 0/6] copyleft-next: project name / remove anti-tivoization clause Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 10:48:39 -0700 Message-Id: <1342115325-9443-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.10.rc1.22.gf5241 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" My last series of patches require a rebase based on the latest changes, so patches 1-4 are a simple rebase. Patch 5 and 6 address removing the anti-tivoization clause, section 7. This will at the very least clarify whether or not copyleft-next can or cannot be considered as a licensing project with hopes of using it for the Linux kernel. Given copyleft-next's focus on separating from the Church and in my views any possible 'corporate taint', I'm in hopes that copyleft-next *can* consider the Linux kernel community as a possible future and valuable stakeholder. Luis R. Rodriguez (6): copyleft-next: remove issue tracker references copyleft-next: more project name updates Copyleft.next->copyleft-next copyleft-next: rename the file COPYLEFT.next to copyleft-next copyleft-next: embrace the Signed-off-by practice copyleft-next: remove section 7 - Tivoization copyleft-next: re-enumerate sections ABOUT | 10 ++--- CONTRIBUTING | 45 ++++++++++++++------ COPYLEFT.next => copyleft-next | 90 ++++++++++------------------------------ 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-) rename COPYLEFT.next => copyleft-next (82%) -- 1.7.10.rc1.22.gf5241