[ClusterLabs] Pacemaker license

Jan Pokorný jpokorny at redhat.com
Tue Jan 19 12:06:49 EST 2016

On 12/01/16 11:27 +1100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On 6 Oct 2015, at 9:39 AM, Santosh_Bidaralli at Dell.com 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:

Jan (Poki)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20160119/27347c64/attachment-0003.sig>

More information about the Users mailing list