On 25/05/2021 15.29, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 9:05 AM Patrick Riehecky <riehecky at fnal.gov> wrote: >> >> On Mon, 2021-05-24 at 23:24 +0200, Peter Georg wrote: >>> On 24/05/2021 22.32, Patrick Riehecky wrote: >>>> I'm loving the ideas/thoughts/etc here! >>>> >>>> Perhaps, we could add a Roadmap item for non-GPLv2 stuff? >>>> Personally, >>>> there are just a few items that I'd love to have which are not >>>> GPLv2. >>>> I'd hate to block on sorting this out now, when I suspect there >>>> will be >>>> some more input/concerns/etc. >>>> >>>> Pat >>> >>> Just to clarify: non-GPLv2 stuff is part of the proposal. But even >>> the >>> the discussion with Neal Gompa). >>> >>> These modules are indeed not mentioned explicitely on the roadmap, >>> but >>> are included in the third point "Provide packages for further >>> beneficial >>> point with improved wording or add an additional point to the >>> Roadmap. >>> >>> What are the non GPLv2 items you are interested in? >>> All the non-GPLv2 stuff I'm interested in is sadly out due to the >>> restriction to GPLv2 compatible licenses. >>> >> >> The two modules non-GPLv2 modules I'd probably get the most use out of >> are ZFS on Linux and the nVidia display module. >> > > ZoL produces kmod packages themselves and continuously integrates > against CentOS Stream already. NVIDIA is doing their own kmod builds > for RHEL and derivatives too. I do not know about ZoL, but nVidia is currently not providing any kmod builds for CentOS Stream, only RHEL. Anyway, this does not really matter as both have a non GPL v2 compatible license. Assuming that the restriction to GPL v2 compatible licenses for kernel modules by Red Hat Legal applies to CentOS (and its SIGs), I'm not sure there is anything we, and especially I, can do in this case. The only thing I can think of is asking Brian Exelbierd (Red Hat Liaison) for confirmation that this restriction indeed applies. However I expect the answer to be "Yes". > > >