Libvirt Rust bindings could use some work

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 11:53 AM Wim de With <wf at dewith.io> wrote:
>
> > Since the intent of libvirt using LGPL was explicitly to allow non-GPL
> > compatible applications to use libvirt, it is a mistake to be using
> > a license that breaks this ability for Rust.
> >
> > In Golang we've used MIT license
> >
> > For Rust we should aim for whatever is most appropriate - MIT or BSD
> > or Apache - I'm not familiar with which is dominant in the Rust world.
>
> Apache and MIT or even dual licensing of both are the most common.
> The official API guidelines recommend dual licensing under Apache and
> MIT.
>

I would prefer we didn't repeat that dumb advice in libvirt-rs. Just
go with Apache-2.0 if we want a permissively licensed crate. I would
suggest MPL-2.0 for libvirt-rs, though. That allows proprietary
linking but maintains that each file that makes up the crate *must*
remain FOSS, and is compatible with GNU licenses. It's static-link
compatible copyleft, basically.



--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!