From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Grover Subject: Re: scsi target, likely GPL violation Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:21:00 -0800 Message-ID: <50A5328C.800@redhat.com> References: <509A915B.30105@redhat.com> <509B117A.6070708@genband.com> <509BE460.6010404@redhat.com> <1352405111.29589.476.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> <509C22B2.8010600@redhat.com> <1352426896.29589.512.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> <20121109110336.41833034@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <14c701cdc059$d6fd28b0$84f77a10$@rosenlaw.com> Reply-To: andy@groveronline.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <14c701cdc059$d6fd28b0$84f77a10$@rosenlaw.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org, kcopenhaver@choate.com, Richard Fontana , Marc Fleischmann , Nicholas Bellinger , alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, bkuhn@sfconservancy.org, tytso@mit.edu, andy@groveronline.com List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Hi all, =46irst, I do not, and did not, have access to the proprietary OS, whic= h has been referred to. Otherwise, I would have checked it. Second, I appreciate that my questions and tentative inferences may not have been perfect, given that I did not have the complete facts, but I did try to obtain them from RTS before raising questions in this forum. But I was not successful. Third, in retrospect, I think a more measured approach to the dialog may have been a better course. I am interested in understanding the situation. My primary goal was to avoid duplicating a lot of work, if RTS plans to open-source the new features they have added to the proprietary version. =46ourth, my questions about the GPL=92s requirements in this context r= emain. =46inally, I was, in this thread, speaking on my behalf alone and at my initiative-- not Red Hat=92s, as some may have incorrectly concluded. I'll be using a personal email account (CC'd) for this issue in the future, in order to make this more explicit. Regards -- Andy