On 07/13/2016 10:30 AM, Lars Kurth wrote: > > On 13/07/2016 15:22, "Boris Ostrovsky" <boris.ostrov...@oracle.com> wrote: > >> On 07/13/2016 09:21 AM, Lars Kurth wrote: >>> Boris, >>> >>> I can't remember how we managed this process the last time round (see >>> for https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9172431/), but in that case we >>> already had a patch. As far as I can see, we don't have the complete >>> patch yet. >>> >>> Thus, the question I would have to you is whether you want to prepare >>> the complete patch first or get the approvals of all stake-holders first? >> I certainly can (and should) prepare and post the patch but I thought we >> should first come up with (A) list at the least. > It's basically in this thread already and is > - Kouya Shimura <ko...@jp.fujitsu.com> > - Daniel's old private e-mail address, if still active. > - Stefan Berger <stef...@us.ibm.com> > - Simon Horman <ho...@verge.net.au> > - Keir <k...@xen.org> > > Possibly Paolo > >> OTOH, we can at least >> review the patch first here on xen-devel without bothering people from >> that list with revisions. So yes, I will.
Which LGPL version are we using? Most libxc and all libxl files say it's strictly 2.1: "... version 2.1 only. with the special exception on linking described in file LICENSE" (with LICENSE file not provided, which I assume meaning that it's vanilla 2.1). However, some files in libxc are less restrictive in this regard: "either version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.". (I will be out tomorrow and won't respond until Friday) -boris _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
