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

[Masatake YAMATO]

Thank you very much.
I'll push my patch again.

Masatake YAMATO

> On 12/14/2010 08:04 AM, Masatake YAMATO wrote:
>> Thank you for replying.
>> 
>>> 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.
>> 
>> I see.
>>  
>>>> 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...
>> 
>> ...it is too bad. I strongly believe FOSS developers should know the
>> intent behind of the both licenses.
>>  
>>>> 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 see.
>>  
>>>> 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?
>> 
>> Could you see https://github.com/masatake/wireshark-plugin-rhcs/blob/master/src/packet-corosync-totemnet.c#L156
>> I refer totemnet.c to write dissect_corosynec_totemnet_with_decryption() function. 
>> 
>>>> 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
>> 
>> Masatake YAMATO
> 
> Masatake,
> 
> Red Hat is the author of the totemnet file and can provide that code
> under GPL if you like.  We cannot modify the license for libtomcrypt as
> we are not the authors.  Feel free to change the license for that
> particular code you rewrote in the link
> 
>> Could you see
> https://github.com/masatake/wireshark-plugin-rhcs/blob/master/src/packet-corosync-totemnet.c#L156
> 
> under a GPL license if it helps move things along.
> 
> Regards
> -steveu