Open Stack

Sooo....we do have a precedence (multiple of them in fact), just it
seems to be flying under the radar?

On 14 November 2016 at 11:26, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
> On 2016-11-14 09:53:03 -0600 (-0600), Michał Jastrzębski wrote:
> [...]
>> We don't have any other project with multiple licenses in it? What
>> would LICENSE file in github show? Do we need to mention parts of
>> GPL there?
>
> We have plenty (I expect it may even be a majority) of repos
> containing files under different licenses, though I'm not aware of
> examples of one of our repos containing files under a mix of GPLv3
> and Apache License v2.0.
>
> A quick search for http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=gpl&i=1 turns
> up the openstack/murano-apps repo which has content aggregated under
> a mix of Apache License v2.0, GPLv2 (inherited from Plone), GPLv3
> (from Clearwater), and GNU AGPLv3 (SugarCRM); it calls them out with
> separate LICENSE files in different subtrees. The openstack/vmtp
> repo has an aggregation of Apache License v2.0, BSD and GPLv2 files
> with some details in their README.rst explaining the situation. A
> number of Apache-licensed repos used to include a tools/rfc.sh
> script (copied from Horizon I think?) which claimed in its comment
> header to be distributed under GPLv3, though these seem to have been
> cleaned up in all non-retired repos more recently. The
> openstack/fuel-library repo has a dangerous-looking mix of Puppet
> modules under Apache License v2.0 and GPLv2 licenses, so probably
> not a shining example of how to go about this.
>
> Hopefully that provides a diverse cross-section of examples.
> --
> Jeremy Stanley
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>