Re: [QUESTION] What is the best license option for new files introduced in QEMU?

[Aleksandar Markovic]

On Monday, November 25, 2019, Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 11/25/19 1:25 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote:
>
> > Thomas pointed to me that I mixed up GPL and LGPL - which is true.
> >
> > Still, the question remains with these options:
> >
> > * GPL 2.0
>
> Not good. It artificially limits who can reuse this code.
>
> > * GPL 2.0 + wording "or later (at your option)"
>
> Matches what qemu itself uses, so fine; but makes it harder to reuse the code in a standalone library.
>
> > * LGPL 2.1
>
> Same problems as GPL2-only
>
> > * LGPL 2.1 + wording "or later (at your option)"
>
> Looser than qemu as a whole, has all the benefits of GPL2+ plus the additional benefit of being able to copy the code into other LGPL standalone libraries.
>
> It's also acceptable to use even looser licenses, like BSD 2-clause, but preferably only if that other license is already used by part of qemu (we don't need to make our mix even worse than it already is).
>
> > The context of my question is that I am reviewing a series that came
> > with files with different license preambles (or without it at all), and I
> > want to advice the submitters on the best option.
>
> You may also want advice from lawyers, based on how you see your code being reused outside of qemu.  This list can offer advice, but it is non-binding and may not best fit your needs.

I truly appreciate your response!

> -- 
> Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3226
> Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org