Open Stack

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Eric Harney <eharney at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 03/19/2013 04:01 PM, Chuck Short wrote:
>
>> On 13-03-19 03:06 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/19/2013 02:56 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03/19/2013 02:16 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03/19/2013 01:54 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/19/2013 01:31 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>> To be clear, I'm really not sure whether this is our policy either. I
>>>>>>> guess I always assumed it was, but that's based on nothing
>>>>>>> substantive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> So Sean, if you were doing a license review, was this the only (A)GPL
>>>>>> dependency you found (are there any GPL deps) ?
>>>>>>
>>>>> For the record, I was speaking to Sean and neither of us know of any
>>>>> problematic Python dependencies in the Folsom release.  This would only
>>>>> apply to new dependencies introduced in the Grizzly timeframe.
>>>>>
>>>> The list of new dependencies for Grizzly that got are the following:
>>>>
>>>> jsonpointer                BSD-like    0.5
>>>> python-alembic            MIT    0.4.2
>>>> python-jsonpatch            BSD-like    0.10
>>>> python-openssl (pyOpenSSL)     Apache V2    0.13
>>>> python-rtslib                AGPL V3    2.1.fb27
>>>> python-stevedore            Apache V2    0.8
>>>>
>>>> All the others are fine and license compatible besides python-rtslib.
>>>>
>>> Great, thanks.  So how about we do this:
>>>
>>> 1) Move cinder-rtstool to its own separate repo (rtstool).  This could
>>> be on stackforge for convenience, but it would not be an official
>>> OpenStack project.
>>>
>>
>> Sure why dont we ask the cinder people how they want to handle this.
>>
>>
> I've been digging into this today -- I think this proposal sounds
> reasonable.  1, 2, and 3 here give a working solution that shouldn't be too
> much effort.  It just requires that rtstool gets packaged in distros as
> well, which is another step, but should be ok.
>
>
>
>>> 2) Remove rtslib from the requirements list of Cinder.  Don't list
>>> rtstool as a requirement.
>>>
>> How about we email the author of rtslib to re-license it to a more
>> friendlier license and bump the version required by cinder?
>>
>>> 3) Make sure Cinder can gracefully handle whether or not rtstool is
>>> present on the system.
>>>
>> Afaik rtstool is not enabled by default so this shouldnt be a problem.
>>
>>  4) The TC needs to work on clarifying license policy and ensuring that
>>> we have a process in place to make sure the policy is reviewed for each
>>> new dependency.
>>>
>>> 5) Cinder folks may want to consider targetd support in Havana.  It
>>> would be HTTP access to something (A)GPL licensed as opposed to having
>>> to execute something.  Executing something should still be fine though
>>> AFIAK, but IANAL.  :-)
>>>
>>>  chuck
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.**org <OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>> http://lists.openstack.org/**cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**openstack-dev<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.**org <OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> http://lists.openstack.org/**cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**openstack-dev<http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>

Just a point of clarification, I in NO WAY meant to say that the AGPL or
any other open source license was ridiculous.  I should have been more
clear with respect to my comment regarding the situation we are in at this
stage of the release with the incompatibility of the licenses etc. and some
of the concerns.

To be fair, early this morning when all of this started some of the authors
for AGPL reached out to see if they could help in any way, I hope that I
did not offend them or anyone else on this email list, that was not my
intent at all.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130319/d6c7b01f/attachment.html>