On Dienstag, 24. August 2021 17:24:50 CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > On Dienstag, 24. August 2021 16:45:12 CEST Markus Armbruster wrote: > > Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_...@crudebyte.com> writes: > > > On Dienstag, 24. August 2021 10:22:52 CEST Markus Armbruster wrote: > > [...] > > > > >> Please use GPLv2+ unless you have a compelling reason not to. > > >> > > >> [...] > > > > > > Is that a requirement? > > > > > > It is just my personal license preference. AFAICS there are numerous > > > sources in QEMU released under MIT license as well. > > > > The licensing situation is a mess. > > > > The only hard requirement is "compatible with GPLv2+". We prefer GPLv2+ > > for new code, except as detailed in ./LICENSE. We're stuck with a > > sizable body of existing code that is GPLv2 (no +), but decided to put > > limits to that madness. Again, see ./LICENSE for details. > > > > I'm asking you to help with limiting the madness by sticking to GPLv2+ > > whenever possible. > > Okay, I see that there is quite a homogenous license structure in Qemu. > However the MIT license is a very permissive license, so I don't see any > conflicts.
s/homogenous/heterogeneous/ > What if I release this file under public domain? That's not even copyleft at > all. What that be OK for you? "Would" that be OK for you? > My idea was that people might simply take this header file and use it in > other C projects as well. Putting it under GPL might cause conflicts for > other projects. Best regards, Christian Schoenebeck