[ClusterLabs] Pacemaker license

[Andrew Beekhof]

> On 20 Jan 2016, at 4:06 AM, Jan Pokorný <jpokorny at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> 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:
> https://github.com/jnpkrn/pacemaker/commit/e5210be68779529407316c5c602e4edc2c2d75c0

agreed, can you merge that please?

> 
> -- 
> Jan (Poki)
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list: Users at clusterlabs.org
> 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