I just think about something : if you really do not want Shinken to be proprietary (even if I say it will never happened if I'm still alive) why not send us some small patchs?
With it, you will have control about the license and not letting a proprietary license came. There is some quite easy task in the trac : *add check_period implicitly inherited from host to service https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/shinken/ticket/80 (just add "check_period" to one tab, easy task, 5 minutes max, promise) *Timezone : https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/shinken/ticket/51 I never use it in Nagios, so you are the best person to do it in fact. I think this should not be too hard isn't it? *size limit for checks outputs : https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/shinken/ticket/82 quite easy if you use http://shinken-monitoring.org/doc/development-hackingcode.html to know how add a parameter in the global file (one line) and I can help you on how pass this parameter to pollers It can also show how the code is done, and it's a better explanation about what I said in the december thread in fact :) Jean On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:35 AM, nap <napar...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Ethan Galstad <egals...@nagios.com> wrote: >> I'm just joinging the list, so I can't reply to previous messages as >> normal, so I'll quote one of the recent replies regarding licensing... >> >> nap: >>> LOL, so funny, make me nearly fall from my chair :) >>> >>> You do not really know what Shinken is isn't it? When I say it's a >>> fork, I do not mean I take Nagios code, change the licence (and I'm >>> totally agree that's not possible to change Nagios license, hopefully >>> ;) ) and say : "Hey, I'm totally something totally different". I did >>> not "steal" code (even if I do not like the "steal" usage in a open >>> source context). >>> >>> No. >>> >>> It's a TOTAL reimplementation of the code! I do not take a SINGLE line >>> of the Nagios code. Only the documentation (in fact the doc from >>> monitoring-fr, you know, the ex nagios-fr...) and this part got a >>> LICENSE file of GPLV2. (you should look at this docbook documentation, >>> very good docbook format by the way). >>> >> >> There is no "documentation" that references in detail how to >> programmatically process timeperiod logic for Nagios Core, yet somehow >> this managed to be magically "re-implemented" in the Shinken Python >> code. Pixie dust must be flying on someone's network to have made that >> happen. > Yes, there is no documentation about how datetimes (inside > timeperiods) are defined, but the way timeperiods works is quite > obvious : get the next date, that's all. I look at the Nagios code for > the datetime part so see all the was we can defined them. But not for > the algorithms in it (like find the next date for example, and it ask > me quite a lot of papers to find the good algorithm...). > > So if you are right about the "inspiration" part, and the fact I do > not use the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_room_design technique, > I will put the function asides of the rest of the code and AGPL > licence, and make the documentation, then someone else can wrote them > again. > > We are talking about the comments in the timeperiod.py file, and the > function resolve_daterange function (quite long, was quite not > pythonic after all). All others functions were coded without looking > at how Nagios does in the code (and If I'm not wrong, it's better > because exclusion is not working isn't it?). > > >> >> "Re-implementation" when referencing pre-existing code is still covered >> under copyright laws and protects the original copyright holders. There >> is code all around Shinken that could not have been developed without >> having looked at the C code for Nagios Core as the reference. Downtime, >> macros, timeperiod logic, and other Shinken Python code makes it clear >> that the C code from Nagios Core was used as a reference when >> "re-implementing" Nagios Core. > The only part that take inspiration from the code and not the > documentation is datetime format because like you said it's not > documented. That's all. Timeperiod is not affected by it : I wrote my > own algorithm to find a new date because it was a good challenge for > my algorithm skill. > > For downtime and macros, the documentation was enough. Downtime are > just a check of a timeperiod, and macro are just a reverse hash table > after all. > > For the rest of the Shinken code (the distributed way) I do not see > how it can be inspired by Nagios : one is distributed with graph > management, the other is a daemon with all in it. > >> >> This type of "re-implementation" to a different language with a license >> switch would clearly be considered copyright infringement and you could >> find yourself in deep trouble. Since Nagios Core is GPL, you have >> rights to modify it, but you're required to release those changes/mods >> under the same license. The GPL doesn't grant you rights to >> re-implement under a different license when you use the original GPL >> code as a reference. >> >> Since Shinken was "re-implemented" using the Nagios Core code as a >> reference, it cannot be release under the AGPL - it must be released >> under the GPL license. >> >> You don't have rights to change the GPL license associated with Nagios >> Core without getting permission from every person who has contributed to >> the Nagios Core code over the past decade. Neither do I. Those are >> the rules - plain and simple. >> >> If you're going to live in the world of intellectual property, you need >> to understand the rules that you have to abide by. Just because you're >> an "Open Source" guy doesn't mean you have any right to violate licenses >> as you see fit or make the rules up as you go. > > Yes, I will follow the rules, that why I ask help fro the FSF and to > Richard Stallman about this "inspiration" (not using the clean room > design) between two projects. If I must put this part of code in > GPLv2, it's not a problem. Even if it's in a "gray zone", we will > redone the part of code for the datetime function and class names. > > If you find some other portions of code that cannot be wrote without > the nagios code (so with only the documentation) let me know it. > > By the way I choose the AGPL license because I wanted the maximum of > freedom for the users : if they are monitored by some box, they should > be able to get the code that are monitoring them. I though fully new > code was a opportunity to make a upgrade of the license for the users. > It was really not to offense other developers. > > If you do not want the Shinken project to be a proprietary software, I > also do not want it, believe me. If you fear that Shinken become a new > business challenger : it's not the case, I'm a sysadmin, and a happy > sysadmin. With family things, I can't afford to be a business man and > move every where. > > I see that the term "fork" about Shinken can cause problem to both or > ours projects. I'll take "compatibility with" because that better > shows what it is, and people will not think this is based on the same > code (and so is tested from 10 years because that's no true for > Shinken). > > So finally : let wait for a FSF answer, I think they are better than > every one to say if code inspiration need to keep the same license. If > we need to change it, we will do it (then go to GPL, than rewrote the > part into AGPL with documentation based informations for datetime). > The "fork" term will be remove from all places where Shinken is (where > I can edit of course) to put "compatible with" or something similar. > > Believe me, I do not want a war between our two projects because > everyone will lose in this game, and Zabbix/Zenoss will just have more > users. If we can cooperate about improvement about configuration or > documentation, I will be happy to to it. There is no chance I stopped > Shinken project, I'm not related to the Nagios consultant world, and I > still want to be a sysadmin (this is the best way to understand the > users : be one of them :) ). There still a hope in my mind so theses > two projects will merge one day. > > > Jean Gabès > >> >> >> Ethan Galstad >> President >> ___ >> Nagios Enterprises, LLC >> Office: (888)NAGIOS-1 x701 >> Fax: (651)204-9103 >> Mobile: (651)278-1477 >> Email: egals...@nagios.com >> Web: www.nagios.com >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate >> GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the >> lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo >> _______________________________________________ >> Shinken-devel mailing list >> Shinken-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shinken-devel >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo _______________________________________________ Shinken-devel mailing list Shinken-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shinken-devel
