From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50588) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFax6-0004t1-JT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 21:58:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFax4-0007Aw-AC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 21:58:00 -0400 Received: from e28smtp09.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.9]:52234) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFax3-00079y-PI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 21:57:58 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp09.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 07:25:35 +0530 Received: from d28relay01.in.ibm.com (d28relay01.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.58]) by d28dlp01.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8899AE002D for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 07:29:12 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (d28av02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.64]) by d28relay01.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r2D1vlZX25297112 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 07:27:48 +0530 Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av02.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r2D1vpdr007004 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:57:51 +1100 Message-ID: <513FDCF6.2090308@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:57:10 +0800 From: Wenchao Xia MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1363000996-13221-1-git-send-email-xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1363000996-13221-2-git-send-email-xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <513E1934.4030908@redhat.com> <513EB6B3.9050609@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <513F5485.7060908@redhat.com> <513F5649.4030200@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <513F5649.4030200@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V9 01/14] block: move bdrv_snapshot_find() to block/snapshot.c List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, stefanha@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com 于 2013-3-13 0:22, Eric Blake 写道: > On 03/12/2013 10:15 AM, Eric Blake wrote: >> As far as I can tell, there is nothing wrong with leaving the file as >> BSD licensed instead of trying to insist that it be LGPL. The block >> layer will still be [L]GPL because of other files linked together, but >> there is nothing inherently wrong with linking a BSD file into an [L]GPL >> product. In other words, if you are okay with keeping the existing >> looser BSD license on this file only, it still won't change the license >> of the overall block layer, and it would save you the hassle of tracking >> down earlier authors to ask for a relicense. > > Another alternative is to have two licenses covering appropriate > portions of the file. For example, aio-win32.c has two licenses: a > GPL2-only license for older history, and a GPLv2+ license for all new > changes. In your case, you might be able to write a license that states > that contents of code copied from other files is BSD, but all new > contributions are LGPLv2+. > > But again, this is something where I suggest you get an official answer > from a maintainer, and not just opinions from a random reviewer, > regarding what approach you should take to licensing your code motion. > Thanks for your comments, I am ignorant about licenses. Dual license seems good to me. Paolo, can I have your opinion on this? -- Best Regards Wenchao Xia