Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of donal.lafferty@citrix.com
 designates 46.33.159.39 as permitted sender)
From: Donal Lafferty <donal.lafferty@citrix.com>
To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org"
	<cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>, "'aemneina@gmail.com'"
	<aemneina@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 21:37:11 +0000
Subject: RE: Redistributing 3rd party code licensed under Apache License 2.0
Thread-Topic: Redistributing 3rd party code licensed under Apache License 2.0
Thread-Index: Ac4D4mEVJYReko9CTTyk6VdPSTLUAAAAoJhQ
Message-ID: 
 <81A73678E76EA642801C8F2E4823AD2101418307076B@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
References: 
 <CAKprHVZgfiqz9zOn5MxbAjyVeMhNVbWvcOyWPn90txy=Nd9WrQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CD302851.5FF0%chiradeep.vittal@citrix.com>
 <CA+96GG5QDtXNBecLdbA3ShonQrC3z_qSnx3+2KcD6DHSu9U6Jg@mail.gmail.com>
 <0A6C7CDA-9530-4260-9DF5-8A713118FF5A@gmail.com>
 <CAO+D_1w7TK4-swWQHyVsWj7gvHzdy59nVyJeTPnTr5trxOEZtw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAO+D_1w7TK4-swWQHyVsWj7gvHzdy59nVyJeTPnTr5trxOEZtw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

To be clear, the 3rd party dependency is now limited to code written by Clo=
ud.com, now owned by Citrix Systems.

The background is that in 2010, Chiradeep wrote hyperv.py for the Diablo re=
lease of OpenStack.  The source is clearly copyrighted Cloud.com (see https=
://github.com/openstack/nova/blob/stable/diablo/nova/virt/hyperv.py).  The =
contributors license doesn't assign the copyright (see https://rackspace.ec=
hosign.com/public/hostedForm?formid=3DXFNNZV3W23XE7N), rather it provides a=
 perpetual license.  The code in this file was updated to remove dependenci=
es on OpenStack and allow it to understand CloudStack commands, so it canno=
t be reused unmodified.

Since the code is going away after this release, a rewrite would have a ver=
y short lifetime.

Citrix has already donated a chunk of cloud.com IP to Apache CloudStack.  C=
an I not use the process for this file?


DL


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ahmad Emneina [mailto:aemneina@gmail.com]
> Sent: 05 February 2013 20:49
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Redistributing 3rd party code licensed under Apache License =
2.0
>=20
> +1 for write new apache code as per spec. since thats what will
> +eventually
> have to happen.
>=20
>=20
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Sebastien Goasguen
> <runseb@gmail.com>wrote:
>=20
> >
> > On Feb 5, 2013, at 8:46 PM, Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
> > > <Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com> wrote:
> > >> I'd like Donal to offer up an alternative implementation if
> > >> possible. Is this the long-term supportable implementation? Or is
> > >> it just a hack to
> > get
> > >> things moving?
> > >
> > > OK - the thread on legal-discuss@a.o seems to have wound down.  For
> > > those interested, you can read it at [1].
> > >
> > > The tl;dr version is:
> > >
> > > This isn't a legal problem, but it's a community issue.  We have the
> > > legal "right" to use that code, based on it's stated license.  We do
> > > NOT have the right to change the copyright headers, only to add our
> > > own for the specific files where there were material changes.
> > >
> > > The community issue is more important though (and by community, we
> > > are talking about the broader OSS community).  The suggestion is
> > > that we either (1) ask for permission before including this code in
> > > our repo, or (2) find a way to use it as a dependent library.
> > >
> > > Given it's source (and what Donal has told me offline), I think we
> > > are better off having this written as pure Apache code.  If that's
> > > not a possibility, then asking to include the code is important.
> > > And further, we need to determine if we are going to "fork it" or
> > > "maintain an upstream relationship" with the source.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> >
> > +1 to re-write as pure Apache code
> >
> >
> > >
> > > -chip
> > >
> > > [1] http://markmail.org/thread/ajmuxmxfdrcurswp
> > >
> > >> On 1/31/13 10:16 AM, "David Nalley" <david@gnsa.us> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Donal Lafferty
> > >>> <donal.lafferty@citrix.com> wrote:
> > >>>> As a non-committer, developing in the Apache repository was never
> > >>>> an option.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Would Citrix want the Hyper-V driver it bought with Cloud.com?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Is there a NOTICE-based means of including Apache Licence 2.0
> > >>>> code in the repository that originated with the OpenStack project?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Should I put the driver in the 'extras' folder?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I'm not sure what procedures are available.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> So, quite honestly, we don't know either. We've sought out advice
> > >>> from mentors and they've pointed us to legal-discuss, and that
> > >>> conversation is happening there now. Lets not get too concerned
> > >>> until we find out what the folks who do know say and we can figure =
a
> path from there.
> > >>>
> > >>> --David
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >