<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 14 October 2016 at 06:23, Contrib Open Source <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:contrib.open.source@gmail.com" target="_blank">contrib.open.source@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>Here "metadata" stands for "oe-core recipe", right ?</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>"metadata" includes all the recipes and classes in oe-core.</div><div>Â </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>What if we extend (*.bbappend) a GPLv2 recipe: is it "contaminated" or not ?</div></blockquote></div><br>Presumably (note: I Am Not A Lawyer), which is why metadata is licensed under the MIT.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Ross</div></div>