On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 10:06 +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > If you had standalone tools/command or utility programs that don't talk > > to each other, I suspect it would have been ok. > > > > Upstart is one of those applications that everyone in the system needs > > to communicate via D-Bus messaging where the Message API is defined by a > > GPLv3 application in this case Upstart. > > > The Upstart D-Bus interface is very much intended to be a public > interface that any software may use without licence contamination. The > D-Bus protocol is an official freedesktop.org standard, and the Upstart > interface is published and documented over that protocol according to > the standard. > > This is a long way from "intimate" (the old IPC interface 0.3 uses could > be described as intimate, and one of the reasons it was dropped was to > avoid this issue). > > If this needs specific addressing, I could add a comment to the > dbus/*.xml (which define the interfaces) explicitly stating that > software may freely use these interfaces. > Since it seems to make sense to do so anyway, I have made this change http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~scott/upstart/trunk/revision/1120 http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~scott/upstart/0.5/revision/1083
It also makes sense to me that people should be able to copy these files into their tree to generate bindings based from them, so I've placed them under a permissive licence. Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- upstart-devel mailing list upstart-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/upstart-devel