From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 26 Jan 2004 09:46:16 -0500
On Mon, 2004-01-26 at 07:02, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> The last issue is the License: The altq version is released under a
> BSD-style License without advertising clause (the original authors
> kindly agreed to remove it). It is my understanding that this is
> compatible with the GPL, and because the code includes some minor
> amounts of GPL'ed code the correct License is GPL and not
> Dual BSD/GPL. I would be glad if someone can confirm that this is
> correct.
This is probably the most contentious issue (given say current SCO
stoopidty).
Have you talked to the original author on this? I think granting you
written consent to move to GPL may be sufficient.
Yes, let's get this worked out before we stuff it into the tree :)
Patrick, please ask the original author if it's OK to make your
instance of the Linux port pure GPL'd.
|