From: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@suse.com>,
Belanger Martin <Martin.Belanger@dell.com>,
James Smart <jsmart2021@gmail.com>,
Hanumanthu H <hanumanthuh@micron.com>
Subject: Re: nvme-cli license clarification
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 09:57:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220517075712.262gqfbyaylufl33@carbon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YoJ574Sr5oOLSM8T@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 06:16:08PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> > 2. nvme.h
> >
> > The situation here is a bit simpler as Keith is 'owning' most
> > of the lines (monolithic and master branch are almost identically)
> >
> > Copyright (c) 2011-2014, Intel Corporation
> >
> > I suppose someone from Intel needs to signed of the 'or any later
> > version' thing. Keith do you happen to have a contact for this?
>
> I am not sure of who would be interested at Intel in this anymore. This was
> initially just a copy of the Linux kernel's header, though, and diverged
> significantly from there, but I guess we'd need to inherit the original's
> GPLv2 only license?
Indeed, there isn't much left from the uapi header. I see to options.
The first is to accept this situation and mark nvme-cli as GPL-2.0-only
or second we reimplement the necessary parts under GPL-2.0-or-later.
Most of the content is just function declarations and the implementation
is licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later. Do we really have to consider these
declarations as GPL-2.0-only? So this could be moved to a new header
file which is licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later, I suppose.
The rest of the file could be reimplemented fairly simple. What you think?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-17 7:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-16 16:16 nvme-cli license clarification Daniel Wagner
2022-05-16 16:21 ` Keith Busch
2022-05-17 7:57 ` Daniel Wagner [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220517075712.262gqfbyaylufl33@carbon \
--to=dwagner@suse.de \
--cc=Martin.Belanger@dell.com \
--cc=hanumanthuh@micron.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=jsmart2021@gmail.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=martin.wilck@suse.com \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox