From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39959) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaXL8-0008RN-Hh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:49:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaXL7-0002J3-2p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:49:06 -0500 Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:46578) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaXL6-0002Il-UP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:49:05 -0500 Received: by mail-ob0-f173.google.com with SMTP id x4so4887115obh.4 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:49:03 -0800 (PST) From: Anthony Liguori In-Reply-To: References: <1353343228-24870-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:48:59 -0600 Message-ID: <87obitcr10.fsf@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] LICENSE: clarify licensing List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: malc , Peter Maydell Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org malc writes: > On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Peter Maydell wrote: > >> On 19 November 2012 18:21, malc wrote: >> > On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >> +5) Files without explicit licenses fall under the GPL v2. >> > >> > I have issue with this, files without licenses are just that files >> > without licenses. >> >> If we believe this (and it seems a logical thing to believe) >> then QEMU's not distributable until we rewrite or remove or track >> down all authors for all the files without licenses... > > Yes. That's ridiculous. There has always been a LICENSE file with a catch-all clause going back to at least 2005. If a file doesn't have an explicit LICENSE, it falls under the catch all clause. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > -- > mailto:av1474@comtv.ru