On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 07:44:21PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 3:53 PM Eric Blake <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 10:26:55PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > > > Add README.md and LICENSE (copy of COPYING.LIB) file to the module > > > > Typo in the subject line (but LICENSE is correct here in the message > > body) > > I'll fix in v2. > > > > directory. This helps people consuming this code from the tarball, which > > > seems to be the only way to consume now. > > > > > > Preview in gitlab: > > > https://gitlab.com/nirs/libnbd/-/tree/a6f4ff085022ed1e903518f13e0789f0796733d6 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nir Soffer <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > golang/src/libguestfs.org/libnbd/LICENSE | 508 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > Should we use a git symlink, instead of duplicating the file? > > Based on your next comment we need to modify the new license. > > > > golang/src/libguestfs.org/libnbd/README.md | 44 ++ > > > 2 files changed, 552 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 golang/src/libguestfs.org/libnbd/LICENSE > > > create mode 100644 golang/src/libguestfs.org/libnbd/README.md > > > > > > diff --git a/golang/src/libguestfs.org/libnbd/LICENSE > > > b/golang/src/libguestfs.org/libnbd/LICENSE > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..c7c3dcf > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/golang/src/libguestfs.org/libnbd/LICENSE > > > @@ -0,0 +1,508 @@ > > > +This is the general license covering libnbd. The example code (in the > > > +examples/ subdirectory) is distributed under a different license, see > > > +examples/LICENSE-FOR-EXAMPLES. > > > > Does the golang directory structure have an examples/ subdirectory, or > > is this wording only applicable when reading the file from the top > > level? > > The examples are located at golang/src/examples while this license file > is at golang/src/libguestfs.org/libnbd, so this note is not really needed. > > But the tests (libnbd_*_test.go), are actually GPL. I'll replace the > note about the > examples with a note about the tests. > > Do we need LICENSE.tests for this? It seems that licensing is more complicated > than needed in this area. Should we re-license the tests to LGPL?
We can relicense the tests to LGPL if it makes things easier. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW _______________________________________________ Libguestfs mailing list [email protected] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
