Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750927AbWCNFsw (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:48:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751824AbWCNFsw (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:48:52 -0500 Received: from mailout1.vmware.com ([65.113.40.130]:8708 "EHLO mailout1.vmware.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750927AbWCNFsv (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:48:51 -0500 Message-ID: <441658A2.4090905@vmware.com> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:46:10 -0800 From: Zachary Amsden User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rik van Riel Cc: Anthony Liguori , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Virtualization Mailing List , Xen-devel , Andrew Morton , Dan Hecht , Dan Arai , Anne Holler , Pratap Subrahmanyam , Christopher Li , Joshua LeVasseur , Chris Wright , Jyothy Reddy , Jack Lo , Kip Macy , Jan Beulich , Ky Srinivasan , Wim Coekaerts , Leendert van Doorn Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/24] VMI i386 Linux virtualization interface proposal References: <200603131758.k2DHwQM7005618@zach-dev.vmware.com> <441642EE.80900@us.ibm.com> <4416460A.2090704@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1216 Lines: 31 Rik van Riel wrote: > 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. > I believe it says explicitly in our patches that they are licensed under 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. > There is a Signed-off-by line on every patch I send out, with full knowledge that this constitutes the work of the author of the said line, and full knowledge that this commits the patch into the domain of the GPL license. Sorry for sounding like a lawyer here. IANAL, but I thought that was completely implicit in all patches made to GPL'd software. The signed off by provides accountability and open licensing simultaneously. But most importantly, I really don't understand how it is possible to make a patch to the Linux kernel and not release it under GPL. Zach - 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/