Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S261622AbSJFOJW>; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:09:22 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S261619AbSJFOJW>; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:09:22 -0400
Received: from 62-190-217-45.pdu.pipex.net ([62.190.217.45]:16393 "EHLO
	darkstar.example.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S261618AbSJFOJW>; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:09:22 -0400
From: jbradford@dial.pipex.com
Message-Id: <200210061423.g96ENcH3003097@darkstar.example.net>
Subject: Re: BK MetaData License Problem?
To: mingo@elte.hu
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 15:23:38 +0100 (BST)
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210061601040.7386-100000@localhost.localdomain> from "Ingo Molnar" at Oct 06, 2002 04:10:46 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 828
Lines: 16

> 
> until now the Linux kernel tree was distributed in a tarball that had a
> nice COPYING file in a very prominent spot. With BK the situation is
> different - and like i said in previous mails it's not BK's "fault", but
> BK's "effect" - and it's a situation that needs to be remedied, right?

Strictly speaking, isn't it a violation of the GPL for somebody to distribute a single file of any GPLed project, without attaching the COPYING file to it?

E.G. say somebody makes a CVS tree available via the web - you can download foobar.c without ever seeing the COPYING file.

John.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/