From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932227AbXFRToY (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:44:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761905AbXFRToQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:44:16 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:37788 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761429AbXFRToP (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:44:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:43:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Alexandre Oliva cc: Al Viro , Bernd Schmidt , Alan Cox , Ingo Molnar , Daniel Hazelton , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20070614195517.GA4933@elte.hu> <20070614235004.GA14952@elte.hu> <20070615011012.6c09066e@the-village.bc.nu> <20070615012623.GA25189@elte.hu> <20070615101007.0cbfd078@the-village.bc.nu> <4673CA7C.5040207@t-online.de> <20070616181902.GB21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > We can agree to disagree as to our opinions, if you want. That's all I ever asked for. This whole thread started with me saying: I see the smiley, but I hate it how the FSF thinks others are morons and cannot read or think for themselves. Any time you disagree with the FSF, you "misunderstand" (insert condescending voice) the issue. _Please_ don't continue that idiocy. Disagreement and thinking that the FSF is controlling and putting its fingers where they don't belong is _not_ misunderstanding. It's just not "blind and unquestioning obedience". so all I asked for in the first place was that you stop claiming that I had "misunderstood" anything. That's really all I've always asked for: - I chose the GPLv2, and I understand it. - you don't have to agree with my choice, but you *do* have to accept it if you want to work on Linux. Because it's the only license that Linux has ever been released under since early 1992. So as long as you follow the GPLv2 (as a _legal_ license), I don't care if you like it or not. I don't care if you think you are a modern-day Napoleon, or if you are a demented squirrel. I don't care if you are an axe-murderer, or if you make sex toys with Linux. I don't care if your hardware is open or closed. I care about one thing, and one thing only: I care that you respect my choice of license for the projects _I_ started. Nothing more. And it doesn't matter one whit if *you* would have made a different choice. You are not me. You don't hold any power over me, and *your* choices are your own - not mine. Choice of license is personal. Many people think that the BSD license is better than _any_ version of the GPL. Are they wrong? No, it's _their_ choice. Is it relevant for the kernel? No, their preference of license is simply irrelevant. They can choose to accept the license that the kernel is under, or go play somewhere else. I think the GPLv2 is superior to the GPLv3. That is simply not something you can argue against. You can just say "ok, it's your choice". You can ask me *why*, and I've told you at length, but in the end, it doesn't matter. And no, it's not because I'm "special", and I get to make all decisions. It's simply because I am _me_, and when it comes to my own opinions, I actually _do_ get to make all the decisions. You can disagree, and choose to use the GPLv3. You just cannot do it for the *kernel*, because they kernel has always been under the GPLv2, and the GPLv3 is simply not compatible, and asks for things that the kernel license has never asked for. But if you prefer the GPLv3, that's _your_ choice, and that choice can certainly guide you in the licensing of _your_ projects where _you_ are the copyright holder. And I will never complain. Linus