On 12/01/16 11:27 +1100, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> On 6 Oct 2015, at 9:39 AM, [email protected] wrote: >> As per the given link http://clusterlabs.org/wiki/License, it is >> mentioned that “Pacemaker programs are licensed under the GPLv2+ >> (version 2 or later of the GPL) and its headers and libraries are >> under the less restrictive LGPLv2+ (version 2 or later of the LGPL) >> .” >> >> However, website link >> http://clusterlabs.org/doxygen/pacemaker/2927a0f9f25610c331b6a137c846fec27032c9ea/cib_8h.html, >> states otherwise. Cib.h header file needed to be included in order >> to configure pacemaker using C API. But the header file for cib.h >> states that the header file is under GPL license This seems to be >> conflicting the statement regarding header file license. >> >> In addition, which similar issue has been discussed in the past >> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linuxha/pacemaker/75967, no >> additional details on the resolution. > > I thought that was a pretty clear statement, but you’re correct that the > licences were not changed. > > Does this satisfy? > > https://github.com/beekhof/pacemaker/commit/6de9fde
Just a reminder we should review the licenses as declared at particular subpackages within the authoritative specfile. For instance, pacemaker-cli should be GPLv2+ only, AFAICT. And the associated license texts to be distributed along should reflect the reality, too: https://github.com/jnpkrn/pacemaker/commit/e5210be68779529407316c5c602e4edc2c2d75c0 -- Jan (Poki)
pgpgPFMkVvhLk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list: [email protected] http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
