From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Subject: Re: New 'hail' repository created, with major packaging rework
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:56:11 -0400
Message-ID: <4C33602B.6030707@garzik.org>
References: <4C2D8E48.6090902@garzik.org> <20100705131307.1c902878@lembas.zaitcev.lan> <4C323100.5020603@garzik.org> <20100706092452.1d6a5052@lembas.zaitcev.lan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <hail-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from
         :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=Y/1ZqOpXEBsTjO7uLW5ZjsxFxiddkX+XR1PBh7WoAKk=;
        b=p5EzBsmVSSRtaNN1/RV/mGKam0o7PYSvdCI/FIfyHHJqqC1YnLWp1MNmy0b7x1xzqg
         /8DsfJrSlZbJUTKRhy/UQo0WhXxW36SeDDoiuLE7XUMZ5Ect8hjOZu0yFme6XwT+Oo07
         cCsc1uqCbYr29jez/lsclBnXsYEBiL9h7BH9c=
In-Reply-To: <20100706092452.1d6a5052@lembas.zaitcev.lan>
Sender: hail-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <hail-devel.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
To: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@redhat.com>
Cc: Project Hail <hail-devel@vger.kernel.org>

On 07/06/2010 11:24 AM, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 15:22:40 -0400
> Jeff Garzik<jeff@garzik.org>  wrote:
>
>> Moving libhttpstor is now a simple matter of simultaneous commits to
>> hail.git and tabled.git, moving the code and updating build machinery.
>
> BTW, I suggest we do it differently: rename the functions and
> the struct httpstor as they are introduced in libhail (without
> changing anything else, to prevent accidential regressions).
> This way, tabled and our out-of-tree tests can continue to build
> for a couple of days and smoothly switch over to new libraries.

To what should the functions be renamed?

We will want to copy over the req_sign* stuff as well as httpstor stuff, 
otherwise it's not a full S3 lib.


> BTW 2, what is the license? I am wondering if we should adopt
> a "Lesser GPL" for libhail. I heard some unhappy comments about
> Fefe shipping libraries with GPL, and not necesserily from proprietary
> vendors. There was some stuff wrt linking perfectly free code with MIT
> license or something, but I do not remember details.

A fair point.  It's GPL for the whole package due to laziness, which 
means linking apps MUST be GPL as well.  Even some open sourcers 
complain at this restriction, when it appears in other projects.

LGPL or MIT is fine with me, for libhail.

	Jeff