From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58364) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaWBj-0000Kp-0P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:35:25 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaWBe-00054k-VR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:35:18 -0500 Received: from fe02x03-cgp.akado.ru ([77.232.31.165]:53059 helo=akado.ru) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaWBe-00051Q-O9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:35:14 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:34:57 +0400 (MSK) From: malc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1353343228-24870-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> 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: Peter Maydell Cc: Anthony Liguori , qemu-devel@nongnu.org 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. -- mailto:av1474@comtv.ru