[openstack-dev] Policy on using GPL libraries [was Re: rtslib dependency for cinder is AGPL - thoughts?]

Davanum Srinivas davanum at gmail.com
Wed Mar 20 13:33:41 UTC 2013


fyi, here's the guidance from FSF (Feb 2004) on this non-topic side
bar - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2

-- dims

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Richard Fontana <rfontana at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Quickly correcting my apparent previous misattribution of something
> markmc said to Eric, hopefully not published to the mailing list:
>
>
> Mark wrote
>> there's also the ASF's claim of an incompatibility between the
>> GPLv2 and the patent provisions in ALv2. Let's leave that aside since
>> we're talking about an AGPLv3 licensed project.
>
> Just a comment on this very peripheral item, which I feel compelled
> to make for the benefit of future generations etc.: That is not the
> view of the ASF -- indeed the ASF raised serious doubts about the
> rational basis for this interpretation. Rather it was the view of the
> FSF in ~2004 when it considered the question of compatibility of the
> new Apache License 2.0 with GPLv2.
>
> My view FWIW is that the FSF's view on the patent provisions, as
> publicly explained, doesn't make obvious sense, but that the Apache
> License 2.0 "is" (i.e., should be considered) GPLv2-incompatible
> anyway because of the upstream indemnification clause in Apache
> License 2.0 section 9.
>
> But yes, this admittedly has absolutely nothing to do with the topic
> at hand.
>
> - RF
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list