On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Anthony Liguori wrote: > malc <av1...@comtv.ru> writes: > > > On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > >> On 19 November 2012 18:21, malc <av1...@comtv.ru> 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. > > That's ridiculous. > > There has always been a LICENSE file with a catch-all clause going back > to at least 2005. > > If a file doesn't have an explicit LICENSE, it falls under the catch all > clause. >
Wishful thinking. -- mailto:av1...@comtv.ru
