Licensing Guidelines Update - Please Read

Chen Lei supercyper1 at gmail.com
Mon Jul 26 18:53:35 UTC 2010


2010/7/27 Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa at 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.
>
> ~spot
> --

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?


Regards,
Chen Lei


More information about the devel mailing list