On 06/14/2014 09:55 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 01:20:27PM -0700, Monty Taylor wrote:
So the question at hand is whether or not the license of libmysqlclient carries through and attaches to OpenStack. I contend that it does not, for a specific reason: we're using it as an optional plugin.
We don't use mysql-python itself. We use sqlalchemy, which has pluggable provider support. One of the plugins that can be used with sqlalchemy is MySQL. Another is Postgres. Another is Oracle. Etc. So nothing about OpenStack _itself_ requires MySQL or libmysqlclient. It is a runtime/deployment choice.
Right, makes sense to me. However, Chris Friesen's hypothetical is:
"Suppose someone creates a modified openstack and wishes to sell it to others. They want to keep their changes private. They also want to use the mysql database.
The concern is this:
nova is apache licensed sqlalchemy is MIT licensed mysql-python (aka mysqldb1) is GPLv2 licensed mysql is GPLv2 licensed
The concern is that since nova/sqlalchemy/mysql-python are all essentially linked together, an argument could be made that the work as a whole is a derivative work of mysql-python, and thus all the source code must be made available to anyone using the binary."
So it seems what he really should have been asking is whether (modified) nova/sqlalchemy/mysql-python/libmysqlclient somehow form a derivative work of libmysqlclient.
Hi, I subscribed to follow this discussion. Thank you for the concise summary. I believe you are correct that this is the question I should have been asking. As further background, this would be in the context of providing a complete OpenStack solution (with nova modifications) that would be sold to end-users for private clusters, so the database would be shipped alongside nova, rather than being selected/configured at system install time. Also, I realize that proper legal advice would need to be sought, but I also wanted to get a feel for what stance (if any) the OpenStack community takes on this sort of issue.
I don't think Chris Friesen's question is an OpenStack project question, since the issue he's worried about results from his own discretionary choices downstream, if I understand everything correctly here.
While true that downstream choices are involved, I think it would be beneficial to the OpenStack project to clearly highlight any legal issues around the use of various sub-components. Given that OpenStack itself is Apache-licensed, someone could easily miss the fact that it uses sub-components with other licensing. Chris