Re: [Vote] Results of formal vote for Mirage to be accepted as Xen.org Incubation Project

[Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx>]

[dropping CC to cl-mirage]

On 24 Feb 2013, at 03:10, Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi everybody,
> 
> sorry for the delay in posting the vote results for 
> http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Mirage_Incubation_Project_Proposal.
> 
> The vote breakdown:
> - 6 out of 7 Xen committers voted (including project leads)
> - 5 were in favour

Great news!

> - 1 abstained due to the "choice of the ISC licence rather than a copyleft 
> licence such as LGPLv2+"

This is worth looking into a little more deeply.  The LGPLv2+ isn't appropriate 
for Mirage due to the static linking.  With the unmodified (L)GPL, this would 
require all applications written for Mirage to also be GPLed.

The current practice in the OCaml community is to have a LGPLv2+linking 
exception, which rather defeats the point of a standard copyleft license by 
customising it.

The ISC license is essentially a 'simpler BSD license', but I'm open to 
alternatives if really appropriate.  However, these have to be some form of 
BSD/Apache-like license that are friendly to static linking.

Dave and Mike from Citrix should also be consulted, since a significant number 
of the libraries that Mirage uses are authored by them (and some are 
LGPLv2+exception, which I'd like to normalise around whatever we decide on).

> So overall the vote carries.
> 
> We also several other community members voting in support of the proposal. We 
> also discussed the proposal at the last Xen Maintainer, Committer and 
> Developer Meeting, which expressed support for the proposal.
> 
> What happens next?
> I will work with the Mirage project lead on a detailed plan for the 
> Incubation phase.

-anil