|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/24] VMI i386 Linux virtualization interfac
|
To: |
Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/24] VMI i386 Linux virtualization interface proposal |
|
From: |
Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:30:42 -0500 (EST) |
|
Cc: |
Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, Joshua LeVasseur <jtl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pratap Subrahmanyam <pratap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>, Jack Lo <jlo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Hecht <dhecht@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Christopher Li <chrisl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx>, Anne Holler <anne@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jyothy Reddy <jreddy@xxxxxxxxxx>, Kip Macy <kmacy@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ky Srinivasan <ksrinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>, Leendert van Doorn <leendert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Arai <arai@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:10:10 +0000 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<4416460A.2090704@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<200603131758.k2DHwQM7005618@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <441642EE.80900@xxxxxxxxxx> <4416460A.2090704@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
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
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
Home