Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] acpi: Re-license ACPI builder files from GPLv2 to LGPLv2.1

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 26.08.16 at 14:13, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 08/26/2016 02:54 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 18.07.16 at 16:01, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> 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.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Kouya Shimura <kouya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Daniel Kiper <dkiper@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> CC: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> 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)

Okay, I wrongly thought the Citrix part was already taken care
of. But how can Oracle be still pending when the patch has your
S-o-b?

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel