On 05/18/2012 06:49 AM, Mike McClurg wrote:
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 5:20 AM, David Nalley<da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:58 PM, Kevin Kluge<kevin.kl...@citrix.com> wrote:
David, I had assumed that we could just get this library released under AL2 and
bundle the jar with CloudStack. It'd be great if distros picked it up but
that seems more difficult and longer term than a re-license, given our ability
to influence the license of this particular piece of software. (My
understanding is that Citrix wrote all that code, and it could be released
under multiple licenses if needed, which would presumably not upset the
Xen/XenServer community.)
-kevin
Ahh - I was unaware that this was a solely Citrix-written piece of
software, unlike the rest of Xen* - If we can get it relicensed,
that's better, perhaps we can get our changes upstreamed at the same
time.
Hi all,
I just checked the XenServer API bindings for Java, and it seems that
we've dual-licensed them under the LGPLv2 and Apache v2.0 licenses.
Are there different XenServer API bindings for Java that are licensed
differently, that I'm not aware of?
These bindings are autogenerated, which is why there is no source
repository for them. The license on the API bindings generation code
is GPLv2, so I don't see any reason why we couldn't publish the source
repo for these bindings.
But shouldn't the binding generation code then be part of the xen-server
source base?
I am a bit confused here. It sounds to me that CS depends on Java
bindings to Xen-server, yet the bindings are maintained separately from
the server code, do I understand this correctly? If this is the case
then this is rather strange, I think. For almost every code base that
generates language bindings the generation code/templates/setup is part
of the cde base in question, why would this be any different for xen-server?
Thanks,
Robert
--
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX
Tech Lead
rjsch...@suse.com
rschw...@ca.ibm.com
781-464-8147
