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
