Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 00/23] RISC-V QEMU Port Submission

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:57:10AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 26 February 2018 at 10:47, Daniel P. Berrangé <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I accept that MIT is compatible with GPLv2+, so that's not an immediate 
> > legal
> > problem. The issue is that as we add more & more different licenses to QEMU,
> > it becomes a maintenance burden to developers, especially when doing code
> > refactoring across files. You have to be careful you're not taking a piece
> > of GPLv2+ code and copying/moving it into a file that's MIT licensed, as
> > that would be non-compliant. We already suffer this problem with our mixture
> > of GPLv2-only and GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and BSD licensed code. So I'm 
> > personally
> > loathe to see us add yet another license to the mix.
> 
> Unless I'm confused, we already have a lot of MIT-licensed code in the tree,
> including much of the block layer, accel/tcg, the audio subsystem. Looking
> at vl.c, it was put under the MIT license by Fabrice in 2003, so we've
> been living with it as part of our licensing mix for a very long time already.

Eeek, I totally missed that as the top level LICENSE file only mentions
GPL and BSD licenses :-(  I guess that's a trigger for a patch to improve
the text in the LICENSE file to better reflect reality...

So I guess you can ignore my comments in this thread about MIT license
being different from normal practice in QEMU.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|