On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Jeremy Stanley <fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote:
> On 2016-11-03 15:03:44 -0400 (-0400), Chuck Short wrote: > > I was looking at packaging monasca-statsd since it is a dependency for > > designate, however when I look at the license for it,it says Apache-2. > > However the LICENSE file included in the source is that the software is > > provided as is...etc etc. Could we get some clarification please? > > It looks like https://review.openstack.org/123315 added that > LICENSE file when originally setting up the monasca-statsd repo a > couple years ago. I see a variety of Datadog repositories in > circulation using that license, and they seem to refer to it as "a > simplified BSD license" (which is certainly what it looks like to me > as well). However, all the individual files added in that change > which declare a license in their headers seem to use Apache License > 2.0, which I agree is confusing. Hopefully the Datadog license was > added here in error, and we've not actually been shipping an > incorrectly-licensed derivative of their software this entire time? > -- > Jeremy Stanley > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > Hi, I have checked the version on pypi and tarballs.openstack.org and all the versions from monasca-statsd from 1.0.0 onwards provide the incorrect LICENSE file. chuck
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
