From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5F3EC07E95 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:40:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 761BC61167 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:40:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 761BC61167 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:42290 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m3NK6-0000cZ-AB for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:40:02 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41778) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m3NJS-00087v-Kq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:39:22 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:50342) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m3NJP-0005Db-WA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:39:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1626201559; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=4amw+Ib7tuuwlff1mZA/opCK7Xlzyj2qdVz8QwMFE84=; b=Xv1ZPPPEsbb7yzmTA7+tVlyTB+gimCaujrX4fgPSPPpT+0f2qXm2GEwzr1DhgyFcQ34BPU lGLrkPhZb5Z8NXjmSVErUk6weySjOqaUR/wg/OadrFO3maGLd5W5pZJB9GK5e3bCJQQLH5 pshCh1/eloKWaPOQwMsTIKzEDrkL/w0= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-272-BsrpUmwJPwi_61ST0tJu2g-1; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:39:15 -0400 X-MC-Unique: BsrpUmwJPwi_61ST0tJu2g-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B48A81940920 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-113-1.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.1]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D767D19C45; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:39:12 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 19:39:09 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: John Snow Subject: Re: License advice for Async QMP Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.7 (2021-05-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=berrange@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -34 X-Spam_score: -3.5 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.7, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Luiz Capitulino , Eric Blake , qemu-devel , Andrea Bolognani , Markus Armbruster Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 02:26:28PM -0400, John Snow wrote: > Hi, > > I'm deep into writing a new Async QMP library for QEMU, one that I intend > to ship outside of our castle walls and host on PyPI. > > I need to choose a license for it. I slapped GPLv2 on it in keeping with > the license on the original library by Luiz Capitulino (And it is generally > my preference), but I was debating loosening the license to MIT so that it > plays nicer with Apache-licensed projects. ...Maybe. > > I don't know if that's really necessary, though, and I do generally prefer > a "copyleft" to "permissive" these days. > > My current understanding: > > 1. Apache-licensed projects probably cannot vendor GPL code of any kind > (v2, v3, LGPL) > 2. Apache-licensed projects can *probably* import GPL'd Python code (v2, > v3, LGPL) at runtime without creating a "derivative work", but it isn't a > settled matter, legally. > 3. LGPL has little or no effect on a Python library, because you do not > link against Python as such to produce a combined work -- The PIP installer > generally re-acquires the original distribution and uses that at runtime > instead, which avoids legal hassle from bundling GPL code. > 4. I would *probably* need a permissive license only if I wanted to allow > the vendoring of this Python code by non-GPL projects. > > Does that sound about right? AFAIK, "vendoring" is not relevant as a point to consider from a license compatibility POV. Vendoring is just a fancy word for bundling 3rd party software, and this doesn't create a derivative work - they remain separate entities. I see this as the same situation as the FSF example of an installer bundling the software it is installing: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLCompatInstaller The main time I've had people raise questions about bundling GPL code in an Apache project, the problem wasn't about license compatibility. It was simply their personal desire to never be hosting & distributing any code that is GPL licensed themselves. They are certainly entitled to hold that view, but at the same time I'm disinclined to use that as the only reason to alter my own license preferences, if the licenses are otherwise compatible from a legal POV. IOW, if your preference is to use a copyleft license I don't see a reason to change it. GPL is a common license choice for a lot of python stuff. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|