On 07/15/2016 01:48 PM, Lars Kurth wrote:
>
> On 15/07/2016 18:43, "Ian Jackson" wrote:
>
>
>> This should be
>>
>> Respectfully,
>>
>> Lars Kurth (Xen Project Community Manager)
>> Boris Ostrovsky (Oracle)
>> Ian Jackson (Citrix)
>>
>> and anyone else you can get to sign up :-). (Assuming we
Boris Ostrovsky writes ("Re: [PATCH RFC] acpi: Re-license ACPI builder files
from GPLv2 to LGPLv2.1"):
> On 07/15/2016 01:43 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Boris Ostrovsky writes ("[PATCH RFC] acpi: Re-license ACPI builder files
> > from GPLv2 to LGPLv2.1"):
> >
> >> I added the notice to mk_dsdt.c w
On 07/15/2016 01:43 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Boris Ostrovsky writes ("[PATCH RFC] acpi: Re-license ACPI builder files from
> GPLv2 to LGPLv2.1"):
>
>> I added the notice to mk_dsdt.c which didn't have any. The notice
>> may not be required since mk_dsdt is Xen build tool and is
>> not shipped but
On 15/07/2016 18:43, "Ian Jackson" wrote:
>Boris Ostrovsky writes ("[PATCH RFC] acpi: Re-license ACPI builder files
>from GPLv2 to LGPLv2.1"):
>> ACPI builder is currently distributed under GPLv2 license.
>>
>> We plan to make the builder available to components other
>> than the hvmloader (wh
Boris Ostrovsky writes ("[PATCH RFC] acpi: Re-license ACPI builder files from
GPLv2 to LGPLv2.1"):
> ACPI builder is currently distributed under GPLv2 license.
>
> We plan to make the builder available to components other
> than the hvmloader (which is also GPLv2). Some of these
> components (suc
ACPI builder is currently distributed under GPLv2 license.
We plan to make the builder available to components other
than the hvmloader (which is also GPLv2). Some of these
components (such as libxl) may distributed under non-GPLv2
licenses and thus we may not be able to link the builder
against t
