Hi hermant
On 1/22/2018 1:15 PM, Hemant Agrawal Wrote:
Hi Jia,
On 1/22/2018 7:23 AM, Jia He wrote:
This is BSD-2-freebsd, which is not a approved license for DPDK.
Can you ask Kip Macy, if he/she is ok to re-license it with BSD-3?
Please check with legal, if you can just keep the copyright of Kip
Macy and re license it with BSD-3.
I see the BSD-3 license to be permissive enough to be re-licensed as
BSD-3.
But I am not a lawyer.
I agree this is something we should do, as a maintainer of
librte_ring, I can
do it.
But here, Jia is just moving code in a new file. I don't think this
should block
his patchset from beeing included.
[Hemant] I thought of blocking this kind of moves, so that we get
the license complaint of DPDK faster 😊
Jia, shall keep the original copyrights and headers in this file (i.e.
No SPDX). You need to fix it along with rte_ring.h in near future.
Regards,
Hemant
Ok, I will
Besides ,I got the allowance from Kip Macy just now. He/She allowed dpdk
to license librte_ring.h as BSD-3.
My question:
Would you mind allowing dpdk librte_ring.h to be licensed as BSD 3
instead of BSD 2?
His/her reply:
"I think that's fine. If you're using it be careful I think there's a
fix to memory barrier usage needed more relaxed memory models such as
ARM. I'll check reviews to see if it made it in or not."
That is good. Your Patch v9 looks ok.
Will you please also add another patch for following:
(all files in librte_ring - having BSD-2 license)
/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
*
* Copyright ..... (Intel or your company)
* Copyright (c) 2007-2009 Kip Macy km...@freebsd.org
* All rights reserved.
* Derived from FreeBSD's bufring.h
* Used as BSD-3 Licensed with permission from Kip Macy.
*/
With pleasure, thanks
--
Cheers,
Jia
