On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 09:51:27PM +0000, redbaronbrowser via CentOS-devel wrote:
The situation still is far from ideal. The module should get the kernel marked as tainted. It would be nice if the largest contributor of code to OpenAFS (some company called "IBM/Red Hat") could work towards relicensing under the GPLv2. But the poor selection of license applied to OpenAFS shouldn't force exclusion.
The only thing that IBM could re-license would be the code they published in 2000, which was forked to make OpenAFS 1.0. From what I've been told, less than 30% of the source code in the OpenAFS kernel module is attributable to IBM contributions.
The in-kernel kAFS module is entirely covered by the kernel license, and was developed outside of the OpenAFS/IBM AFS development, so there should be no licensing limits for it that aren't also on any other in-kernel modules that are being built outside of the RHEL/CentOS kernel.