Re: [QUESTION] What is the best license option for new files introduced in QEMU?

[Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>]

On 11/25/19 1:25 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote:

> Thomas pointed to me that I mixed up GPL and LGPL - which is true.
> 
> Still, the question remains with these options:
> 
> * GPL 2.0

Not good. It artificially limits who can reuse this code.

> * GPL 2.0 + wording "or later (at your option)"

Matches what qemu itself uses, so fine; but makes it harder to reuse the 
code in a standalone library.

> * LGPL 2.1

Same problems as GPL2-only

> * LGPL 2.1 + wording "or later (at your option)"

Looser than qemu as a whole, has all the benefits of GPL2+ plus the 
additional benefit of being able to copy the code into other LGPL 
standalone libraries.

It's also acceptable to use even looser licenses, like BSD 2-clause, but 
preferably only if that other license is already used by part of qemu 
(we don't need to make our mix even worse than it already is).

> 
> The context of my question is that I am reviewing a series that came
> with files with different license preambles (or without it at all), and I
> want to advice the submitters on the best option.

You may also want advice from lawyers, based on how you see your code 
being reused outside of qemu.  This list can offer advice, but it is 
non-binding and may not best fit your needs.

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3226
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org