| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-api
Re: [Xen-API] Re: repository for storage manager (/opt/xensource/sm)
Guys, looks to source.
/opt/xensource/sm/ISCSISR.py
#!/usr/bin/python
# Copyright (C) 2006-2007 XenSource Ltd.
# Copyright (C) 2008-2009 Citrix Ltd.
#
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
# it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as
published
# by the Free Software Foundation; version 2.1 only.
#
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
# GNU Lesser General Public License for more details.
#
# ISCSISR: ISCSI software initiator SR driver
#
В Срд, 18/05/2011 в 21:44 +0100, Zheng Li пишет:
> Hi George,
>
> On 18/05/2011 16:53, George Shuklin wrote:
> > I found that files in /opt/xensource/sm is not provided by any package
> > and there is no any repository on github with those files.
> >
> > But those files are licensed under GPL and have great infuence on XCP
> > stability (right now I still fighting with multipath problem and I
> > thought to push patch for solution - but I found nowhere to
> > clone/push).
>
> Where did you found the evidences that SM code was licensed under *GPL*?
> Honestly, I tried a few days ago, but ultimately failed.
>
> * The official XenServer/XCP source ISOs, which are distributed as part of
> XenServer/XCP and are supposed to contain all the open sourced components of
> XenServer/XCP, doesn't contains the SM code (Let me know if I overlooked, I
> only checked one version of XenServer and the newest XCP source ISO content
> list http://downloads.xen.org/XCP/42052/sources/source-1.iso.txt). There, in
> the sm directory, you can only find thepexpect code (Attrib license) which
> the SM component depends on.
> * XCP once released a checkpointed versions of sm.hg on xenbit and probably
> synced it once in a while. However I couldn't find any LICENSE file in the
> directory about the actual license being used. Only some of the source files
> have license heads of *LGPL* (rather than *GPL* as you mentioned). In fact,
> some of the source files even come with proprietary license heads
> (e.g.http://xenbits.xen.org/hg/XCP/xen-sm.hg/file/008eee4e2699/XenCert/XenCert).
>
>
> So the foremost question is not yet whether SM code should move to github
> etc. but whether it's OSS and what's the actual license for each part of it.
> It's probably safe to assume that particular branch of sm.hg that has been
> put on xenbit is intentionally OSS, but I'm not a layer so please take your
> own risk.
>
> HTH.
> Zheng
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xen-api mailing list
> xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
_______________________________________________
xen-api mailing list
xen-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
|
|
|
| |
|
Home