On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Nithin Raju <nit...@vmware.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Nithin Raju <nit...@vmware.com> wrote: >>> Only comment is to add the OVS license on top of each non-empty file. >>> Looks like the original code does not have any licence, but it would >>>still >>> make sense to add a license I think. Looks good otherwise, >>> Acked-by: Nithin Raju <nit...@vmware.com> >>> >>> Ben or Jesse can confirm what the best practice is. >> >>Well, these files came from the Linux kernel so the copyright on them >>is GPL and I don't think that we should be importing them into OVS >>wholesale. Using the actual values should be fine but other things - >>particularly the comments - likely is not. > > Jesse, > Even the code in linux kernel does not have a license: > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/uapi/linux/netfilter/ > nfnetlink_conntrack.h > > > This seems to be true for netfilter code.
A copyright header isn't required for copyright to exist, at least under US law. I don't think that there is too much doubt that the Linux kernel is covered under GPL. >>In other places for OVS, including Windows, we have clean netlink >>definitions inside of OVS header files. I think that would be the best >>course for this as well. > > If we replicate the definitions, it would probably be a verbatim > replication with some cleanup. Is that the approach you are suggesting? > Something like what netlink.c/h is doing in OVS userspace? Yes, I think the existing netlink.h and related definitions already in OVS are a good pattern to follow. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
