[legal-discuss] Licensing options for new project (Kolla) entering big tent
Steven Dake (stdake)
stdake at cisco.com
Wed Jul 8 02:20:40 UTC 2015
Kolla is a project for OpenStack with the mission :
Kolla provides production-ready containers and deployment tools for operating OpenStack clouds that are scalable, fast, reliable, and upgradable using community best practices.
We use a set of libraries only available in Ansible v2.0. Shade  ASL2.0 uses these Ansible python libraries  licensed under a GPLv3 license. We use Shade in Kolla directly. We had planned to fork these libraries in  and cherry-pick only the modules we really need until Ansible 2.0 is available.
I asked the TC if this approach would be in violation of the governance repository here:
To which Robert Collins suggested I speak with legal-discuss in this thread .
As I understand our current license situation, you won't be eligible
for big-tent if you depend on GPLv3 code.
>From the requirements " * Project must have no library dependencies
which effectively restrict
how the project may be distributed or deployed
So I'm also strongly inclined to recommend you speak to the legal list
about the implications here. Using a GPLv3 tool via the CLI is very
different (by the GPL's design) to using it as a library.
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com<mailto:rbtcollins at hp.com>>
HP Converged Cloud
I’d really like a solution that doesn’t involve rewriting all of the Ansible modules from scratch in a different license, but I guess we can do that if necessary. Can the OpenStack legal team provide some guidance for future TC voting around the thread in ? Our deadline for this work is July 31, but we need several weeks to make adjustments to our plans, so if appropriate guidance for the Technical Committee (and our community project) could be offered soon, it would be much appreciated.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the legal-discuss