* Glenn Maynard (g_deb@zewt.org) wrote: > I concur with the other responses: Linus is not the sole copyright holder. > > I'll also reiterate the other problem: even if we believe that the entire > Linux kernel developer body agrees (which may be the case, though I doubt > it), I'm sure there's a lot of code in the kernel pulled from other GPL > projects, whose copyright holders aren't kernel developers at all. Certainly you can develop a case where it's not possible to get clarification on the license. That's not constructive or necessary imv. Clarification from Linus on the kernel's license is sufficient for me, and should be for Debian. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature