On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:53 AM, David Lang <[email protected]> wrote: > Interesting, it's unusual for IBM to contribute code under a different > license than the upstream project (which I believe was GPLv2+ before the > stated desire to shift to ASL) >
One of two options, in order of probability. The first is that they started the contribution before the shift to ASL; as massive an obstacle as doing official OSS contribution from within IBM is (you should /see/ the education & documentation requirements), the legal team approved GPLv3 as the release license and there was too much pain involved in changing "at the last minute." The other option is that IBM legal likes v3's "defensive" stance against providing leverage to competitors and is trying to force things down that path. Unlikely, but there are some actors there that would behave this way. There's a lot of potential commentary here, but knowing the probable actors involved I firmly expect #1. _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE THAT.
