From: Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com>
To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
target-devel <target-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf <rrs@debian.org>,
targetcli-fb-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: targetcli -fb now also Apache 2.0 licensed
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 17:06:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51F06C17.50306@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1374699289.7397.1309.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com>
On 07/24/2013 01:54 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> Yes, which is why I've been accepting his kernel patches the entire time
> that user-space has been forked into -fb. Now that the user-space code
> has been relicensed as promised, there is no longer any reason for a
> separate -fb fork to exist.
>
> That said, it's time to start moving forward toward a single set of
> source trees for upstream userspace, so that all distributions can
> mutually benefit from the effort. As mentioned above, this has so far
> not been enough to get -fb reconciled with upstream.
>
> So I don't consider the above 'holding for ransom' or any nonsense like
> that, considering the end goal is for everyone (not just Fedora) to
> benefit from -fb.
There's nothing stopping any other distro (or commercial entity) from
adopting targetcli-fb. I don't know why they haven't, except that
there's a default attitude that the originator of the project is the
"upstream" forever.
I think I've done a pretty good job maintaining -fb over the past two
years -- -fb has bug tracking, a list, tarballs, and is actively
maintained and improved, all things that are not true of upstream.
My question to you (Nick) is, why don't we all just unify on -fb?
Regards -- Andy
(at oscon this week, replies may be delayed)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-25 0:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-24 6:27 targetcli -fb now also Apache 2.0 licensed Andy Grover
2013-07-24 20:09 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2013-07-24 20:21 ` James Bottomley
2013-07-24 20:54 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2013-07-25 0:06 ` Andy Grover [this message]
2013-07-25 1:19 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2013-07-26 3:31 ` Andy Grover
2013-07-26 7:24 ` Ritesh Raj Sarraf
2013-07-26 15:18 ` Marc Fleischmann
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=51F06C17.50306@redhat.com \
--to=agrover@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=rrs@debian.org \
--cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=targetcli-fb-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).