On 26/08/2016 08:13, "Boris Ostrovsky" <boris.ostrov...@oracle.com> wrote:
>On 08/26/2016 02:54 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 18.07.16 at 16:01, <boris.ostrov...@oracle.com> wrote: >>> ACPI builder is currently distributed under GPLv2 license. >>> >>> We plan to make the builder available to components other >>> than the hvmloader (which is also GPLv2). Some of these >>> components (such as libxl) may be distributed under LGPL-2.1 >>> so that they can be used by non-GPLv2 callers. But this >>> will not be possible if we incorporate the ACPI builder in >>> those other components. >>> >>> To avoid this problem we are relicensing sources in ACPI >>> bulder directory to the Lesser GNU Public License (LGPL) >>> version 2.1 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrov...@oracle.com> >>> CC: Kouya Shimura <ko...@jp.fujitsu.com> >>> CC: Daniel Kiper <dki...@net-space.pl> >>> CC: Stefan Berger <stef...@us.ibm.com> >>> CC: Simon Horman <ho...@verge.net.au> >>> CC: Keir Fraser <k...@xen.org> >>> CC: Ian Jackson <ian.jack...@eu.citrix.com> >>> CC: Lars Kurth <lars.ku...@citrix.com> >> Ian, >> >> I think all required acks are in place now (just went through the >> original thread again), but I think before committing this another >> pair of eyes double checking would not hurt. Could I ask you to >> do that? > >We are still missing Citrix and, ahem, Oracle. For the latter we are >waiting for approval from our legal and it's going rather slow (Konrad >pinged them yesterday) Ah, OK, I thought I had given this but will formally reply to the thread on behalf of Citrix and award an ACKed by >We (actually, Kevin Tian) also discovered one commit from Lenovo --- >801d469ad8b2b88f669326327df03d03200efbfb. Lars has been looking into >what we can do about that since the address on that patch is no longer >valid. I will chat to Jun while at LinuxCon and KVM forum. Lars _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
