On 2017-06-08 17:38, Claudio Scordino wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> 2017-03-21 11:00 GMT+01:00 Jan Kiszka <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
> 
>     On 2017-03-21 10:27, Claudio Scordino wrote:
>     > Dear all,
>     >
>     > I apologize if this topic has been already discussed in list.
>     >
>     > I've noted that the inmate lib is licensed under GPL. Therefore, if I'm
>     > not wrong, its license also affects the inmate binaries that get linked
>     > to it.
>     >
>     > If licensing the hypervisor code under GPL is reasonable for a plethora
>     > of reasons, I wonder if applying the same license for the inmate library
>     > is wise or not, since it may prevent the usage of such library in an
>     > industrial context where the inmate code must remain proprietary.
> 
>     Correct, the inmate library in its current form is not suitable for
>     proprietary inmate development. We only licensed interface header of the
>     hypervisor under dual GPL/BSD, not the library.
> 
>     I wouldn't refuse a relicensing proposal if there is a real need and
>     someone has the time to drive it (hunt down all copyright holders), but
>     I would also like to have a discussion about technical alternatives
>     first, i.e. RTOSes that already come with permissive licenses. I
>     consider Zephyr as the hottest candidate for this right now (x86
>     support, consistent licensing, vivid and growing industrial community).
> 
> 
> Actually, I see the problem more related to the application code (often
> kept proprietary) rather than to the RTOS itself.
> Even without a RTOS, in fact, the problem persists for proprietary
> bare-metal applications. 
> Some RTOSs (e.g., ERIKA Enterprise) are open-source, but come with a
> permissive license allowing static linking of proprieraty application code.
> 
> "git log" extracted 14 contributors for the inmate/lib/ code.
> If you agree, I can try to contact those developers asking for a
> preliminary feedback.
> As a company, we definitely need a license allowing static linking of
> proprietary bare-metal code against the inmate library.
> The license can be similar to the one used by the ERIKA RTOS (i.e. GPL +
> linking exception - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL_linking_exception)
> or an even more permessive license (e.g., BSD, MIT).

>From my POV, GPL + linking exception would be the best to go when we
really want to lift the inmates on that level. But I would have to check
internally with our authorities anyway.

We are currently evaluating Zephyr on Jailhouse, but that is still in a
too early stage to contribute to this discussion or even a decision. How
urgent is the topic for you?

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jailhouse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to