[Linux-cluster] [Openais] packet dissectors for totempg, cman, clvmd, rgmanager, cpg,

[Steven Dake]

On 12/14/2010 07:51 AM, Jan Friesse wrote:
> Masatake,
> 
> Masatake YAMATO napsal(a):
>> I'd like to your advice more detail seriously.
>> I've been developing this code for three years.
>> I don't want to make this code garbage.
>>
>>> Masatake,
>>> I'm pretty sure that biggest problem of your code was that it was
>>> licensed under BSD (three clause, same as Corosync has)
>>> license. Wireshark is licensed under GPL and even I like BSD licenses
>>> much more, I would recommend you to try to relicense code under GPL
>>> and send them this code.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>   Honza
>>
>> I got the similar comment from wireshark developer.
>>
>> Please, read the discussion:
>>     https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3232
>>
>>
> 
> I've read that thread long time before I've sent previous mail, so thats
> reason why I think that Wireshark developers just feel MUCH more
> comfortable with GPL and thats reason why they just ignoring it.
> 
>> In my understanding there is no legal problem in putting 3-clause BSD
>> code into GPL code.  Acutally wireshark includes some 3-clause BSD
>> code:
>>
> 
> Actually there is really not. BSD to GPL works without problem, but many
> people just don't know it...
> 
>> epan/dissectors/packet-radiotap-defs.h:
>> /*-
>>  * Copyright (c) 2003, 2004 David Young.  All rights reserved.
>>  *
>>  * $Id: packet-radiotap-defs.h 34554 2010-10-18 13:24:10Z morriss $
>>  *
>>  * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
>>  * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
>>  * are met:
>>  * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
>>  *    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
>>  * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
>>  *    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
>>  *    documentation and/or other materials provided with the
>> distribution.
>>  * 3. The name of David Young may not be used to endorse or promote
>>  *    products derived from this software without specific prior
>>  *    written permission.
>>  *
>>  * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY DAVID YOUNG ``AS IS'' AND ANY
>>  * EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
>>  * THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A
>>  * PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.  IN NO EVENT SHALL DAVID
>>  * YOUNG BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
>>  * EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED
>>  * TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
>>  * DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND
>>  * ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY,
>>  * OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
>>  * OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY
>>  * OF SUCH DAMAGE.
>>  */
>>
>> I'd like to separate the legal issue and preference. I think I
>> understand the importance of preference of upstream developers.
>> However, I'd like to clear the legal issue first.
>>
> 
> Legally it's ok. But as you said, developers preference are different.
> And because you are trying to change THEIR code it's sometimes better to
> play they rules.
> 
>>
>> I can image there are people who prefer to GPL as the license covering
>> their software. But here I've taken some corosync code in my
>> dissector. It is essential part of my dissector. And corosync is
> 
> ^^^ This may be problem. Question is how big is that part and if it can
> be possible to make exception there. Can you point that code?
> 
> Steve, we were able to relicense HUGE portion of code in case of libqb,
> are we able to make the same for Wireshark dissector?
> 
>> licensed in 3-clause BSD, as you know. I'd like to change the license
>> to merge my code to upstream project. I cannot do it in this context.
>>
>> See https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3232#c13
>>
>> Thank you.
> 
> Regards,
>   Honza


I am not changing corosync license to GPL.  I think the separate plugin
works fine, and we can even take up packaging of it in fedora and Red
Hat variants, if it is maintained in an upstream repo.

Regards
-steve