On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > In your next round of patches, could you clarify the actual licensing of the
> > files?
>
> I'm sorry about the legalese. The patches are patches to the Linux kernel,
> and therefore under GPL v2 by default. I thought that would be implicit.
It would be very bad if Linus started applying code with
a dubious license to the kernel, if we want to keep the
kernel GPL v2.
Having an explicit license and a Signed-off-by: line are
things to remember with big patch sets. At the very least
a Signed-off-by: line..
--
All Rights Reversed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
