On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 03:42:03PM -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote: > Hello, > > First of all, sorry for the boring e-mail, nobody likes to deal with > licenses but it's an unfortunate thing we have to deal with from time to > time. > > Thomas Moschny reported some inconsistencies in the way LXC is currently > licensed. > The bug report is available here: https://github.com/lxc/lxc/issues/36 > > > Basically the way I see it, LXC is made of 4 different bits: > - The main library > - The language bindings > - The binary tools/scripts > - The templates > > In order to make the library easily usable by others, LXC was originally > licensed entirely under the LGPL v2.1 and higher and that certainly > makes sense for any bit in the main library as well as for the bindings. > > Most of the tools, scripts and templates followed course and are also > under LGPLv2.1+, some are under GPLv2 and that's all fine since they're > tools and not libraries. > > > The problem is that we currently have some files that are part of the > library or part of bindings which are licensed under the wrong license, > namely, they're currently under GPLv2. > > I believe this was an oversight and that we should get those switched to > the proper license immediately. But I'm not simply going to go ahead and > do that myself since I'm not the actual copyright holder for those. > > Instead, I'd like the original/main author of those to confirm it's fine > by them and then we can do that. > > > This still means we'll effectively re-license the code of some of our > contributors without explicitly asking them about it. As I said, I'm > convinced that this isn't a problem since we're just talking about a > handful of files and it's always been clear that the LXC library is > licensed under LGPLv2.1+. > > Nevertheless, if anyone contributed to one of those files we're about to > re-license and do not wish their contributions re-licensed, please get > in touch as soon as possible so we can remove the affected code from the > project. > > > The following files will be re-licensed from GPLv2 to LGPLv2.1+: > - src/lua-lxc/core.c (Dwight) > - src/lxc/lxccontainer.c (Serge) > - src/lxc/lxclock.c (Serge) > - src/lxc/lxclock.h (Serge) > - src/tests/cgpath.c (Serge) > - src/tests/containertests.c (Serge) > - src/tests/createtest.c (Serge) > - src/tests/destroytest.c (Serge) > - src/tests/getkeys.c (Serge) > - src/tests/get_item.c (Serge) > - src/tests/locktests.c (Serge) > - src/tests/lxcpath.c (Serge) > - src/tests/saveconfig.c (Serge) > - src/tests/shutdowntest.c (Serge) > - src/tests/startone.c (Serge) > - templates/lxc-ubuntu.in (Serge) > - templates/lxc-ubuntu-cloud.in (Serge)
Sorry, the list is wrong, the templates and src/tests/* are fine to stay as GPLv2, so the ones that need relicensing are only: - src/lua-lxc/core.c (Dwight) - src/lxc/lxccontainer.c (Serge) - src/lxc/lxclock.c (Serge) - src/lxc/lxclock.h (Serge) Serge already did all of his and Dwight was contacted about lua-lxc/core.c > > Any file that currently doesn't contain a licensing header is assumed to > be under the LGPLv2.1+ (as specified in COPYING). > > > Additionally, some of the Android compatibility bits under lxc/includes/ > are licensed under a two-clause BSD license. To the best of my > knowledge, there are no restrictions in linking LGPLv2 code to BSD code. > > > While processing that bug report, I've also noticed some cases where our > license headers are out of date (wrong FSF address) or inconsistent (in > the form, not the content). I'll be fixing those too before I send the > alpha1 pull-request. > > -- > Stéphane Graber > Ubuntu developer > http://www.ubuntu.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more! > Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies > and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step > tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58040911&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Lxc-devel mailing list > Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel -- Stéphane Graber Ubuntu developer http://www.ubuntu.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more! Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58040911&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________ Lxc-devel mailing list Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel
