On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 8:30 AM Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 08:11:47AM -0600, alan somers wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 8:04 AM Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 02:22:32PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 04:19:08PM -0600, alan somers wrote: > > > > > The existing Rust bindings for nbdkit aren't very idiomatic Rust, > and > > > they > > > > > are missing a lot of features. So I've rewritten them. The new > > > bindings > > > > > aren't backwards compatible, but I doubt that's a problem. Most > > > likely, > > > > > nobody has tried to use them yet, since the crate hasn't even > > > published to > > > > > crates.io. Please review the attached patch. > > > > > -Alan > > > > > > > Other issues: > > > > > > > > * The license removed this clause: > > > > > > > > -// * Neither the name of Red Hat nor the names of its > contributors > > > may be > > > > -// used to endorse or promote products derived from this software > > > without > > > > -// specific prior written permission. > > > > > > > > I believe this removal simply makes the license even more > > > > permissive, so that's fine. However I will check with our legal > > > > people. Also you should add license headers to the new files > > > > plugins/rust/tests/*.rs. Essentially every file should have a > > > > license, and correct licensing is very important to us. > > > > > > This change is replacing 3-clause BSD with 2-clause BSD. Shouldn't > cuase > > > any actual difference for consumers, but seems like a needless change > to > > > be making. > > > > My reasoning was that the 2-clause license is preferred for new code (at > > least in every other community where I've active), and this plugin is new > > code. But I can add the 3rd clause back if libguestfs likes it. > > I don't have any opinion on which variant is better. > > The important question is whether this new Rust impl was a completely clean > room impl, or whether it started from existing code & then adapted it. If > the > latter, then changing the license is bad practice, as is removing existing > Copyright statements. > > Regards, > Daniel > It's not a full clean-room implemention like Compaq's BIOS; I did read the original. However, the new plugin contains nothing of the original except for fragments of struct definitions. -Alan
_______________________________________________ Libguestfs mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
