2010/7/27 Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat.com>:
On 07/19/2010 05:42 PM, M A Young wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>> [xen-maint] xen: xen-doc-4.0.0-2.fc14.x86_64
>> xen-libs-4.0.0-2.fc14.x86_64 xen-hypervisor-4.0.0-2.fc14.x86_64
> I am a co-maintainer of the xen package, and I am trying to work out what
> the best way to comply with these changes since xen is rather a mess of
> licenses - I count 25 files or symbolic links called COPYING or LICENSE in
> the unpacked source and the base level COPYING file talks about license
> conditions at the head of some files. They all seem to be basically GPL,
> LGPL or BSD with one case of The "Artistic License".
> Should I include all the COPYING or LICENSE files, one of each type of
> license (though some of the license files have different md5sums even when
> they claim to be the same license) or just the bottom level COPYING file?
You're going to need to include all applicable license texts, sorry.
If a GPL binary is compiled with mixed BSD and GPL source files,
should we also add the BSD license text along with GPL text?