License for new Dockerfiles?

[jzb]

I notice most (all?) of the Dockerfiles here are GPLv2. It's not noted in the contributing guidelines if that's a preferred license for the repo, or the author's preference. If someone wants to contribute a Dockerfile under ASL 2.0, is that acceptable?

[scollier]

This was discussed here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1053222
I'm not a licensing expert, but the least restrictive the better. /cc @mattdm @lsm5 thoughts?

[lsm5]

On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 07:55:49AM -0700, Scott Collier wrote:

This was discussed here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1053222
I'm not a licensing expert, but the least restrictive the better. /cc @mattdm @lsm5 thoughts?
👍

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#52 (comment)

Lokesh
Freenode, OFTC: lsm5

[goldmann]

FYI: For JBoss' dockerfiles we choose MIT.

[LalatenduMohanty]

+1 for GPL :)