Open Stack

Monty Taylor wrote:
> On 03/20/2014 01:30 AM, Radcliffe, Mark wrote:
>> The problem with AGPL is that the scope is very uncertain and the
>> determination of the  consequences are very fact intensive. I was the
>> chair of the User Committee in developing the GPLv3 and I am therefor
>> quite familiar with the legal issues.  The incorporation of AGPLv3
>> code Into OpenStack Project  is a significant decision and should not
>> be made without input from the Foundation. At a minimum, the
>> inclusion of APLv3 code means that the OpenStack Project is no longer
>> solely an Apache v2 licensed project because AGPLv3 code cannot be
>> licensed under Apache v. 2 License.  Moreover, the inclusion of such
>> code is inconsistent with the current CLA provisions.
>>
>> This code can be included but it is an important decision that should
>> be made carefully.
> 
> I agree - but in this case, I think that we're not talking about
> including AGPL code in OpenStack as much as we are talking about using
> an Apache2 driver that would talk to a server that is AGPL ... if the
> deployer chooses to install the AGPL software. I don't think we're
> suggesting that downloading or installing openstack itself would involve
> downloading or installing AGPL code.

Yes, the issue here is more... a large number of people want to stay
away from AGPL. Should the TC consider adding to the OpenStack
integrated release a component that requires AGPL software to be
installed alongside it ? It's not really a legal issue (hence me
stopping the legal-issues cross-posting).

This was identified early on as a concern with Marconi and the SQLA
support was added to counter that concern. The question then becomes,
how usable this SQLA option actually is ? If it's sluggish, unusable in
production or if it doesn't fully support the proposed Marconi API, then
I think we still have that concern.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)