incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org>
Subject Re: [ASFCS40][DISCUSS] How should we move forward to resolution on the config files in "patches"? Was: "Re: [ASFCS40] Configuration file licensing followup"
Date Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:04:23 GMT
However, Debian only ships open source code, so we know we're good there.
What is the upstream license? If the upstream developer is happy with us
using it, then as long as we attribute all the correct people, we should be
good to go.

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Chiradeep Vittal <
Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 9/24/12 5:35 PM, "Chip Childers" <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
> ><Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/21/12 8:37 PM, "Chip Childers" <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Sep 21, 2012, at 8:59 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
> >>><Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I am unable to resolve
> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-147.
> >>>> Perhaps we need a cleanroom implementation or an exception.
> >>>> CLOUDSTACK-147 is the only one in "Unresolved" state
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>> --
> >>>> Chiradeep
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Wow, this is fantastic news!
> >>>
> >>>Yes, thee RAT stuff probably needs to be adjusted a bit (which I'll
> >>>happily own). We also need to do the licensing stuff for the files
> >>>originally included from other projects (again, I'm more than willing
> >>>to get that done early next week).
> >>>
> >>>For that unresolved issue, perhaps we can try what Joe did for
> >>>CLOUDSTACK-146?  Does someone want to try and track down the orig
> >>>developer?  If not, this is a specific item that we can ask for an
> >>>exception on from the legal folks.
> >>>
> >>>-chip
> >>
> >> There is no "original developer", it is a delta from the stock Debian
> >> config.
> >
> >By "original developer", I meant that we could go to the source
> >project for the file itself and ask what claims they believe they have
> >on the file (and / or willingness to change).  Does it make sense to
> >try that?
>
> Sorry, let me clarify. The config file is probably authored by Debian
> developers,
> likely based on a template from the original authors. That is, there are
> multiple developers
> involved unlike the dnsmasq case which had a single author.
>
> Given that the delta from the Debian config is a few lines of key-value
> bindings, we can either
> A) vote on whether this constitutes an acceptable use
> B) ask for legal ruling
> C) develop some way of patching the original with this delta.
>
> --
> Chiradeep
>
>


-- 
NS

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message