Re: Voting on the Scapy licensing resolutions
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Unfortunately I have a conflict and cannot join today but I am interested to follow the discussion.
I do not know if someone will be taking notes.
My understanding of the current issue is that all GPL licensed pieces of code have to be replaced
with a compatible license. Or convince all copyright holders to license FDio code with a double license Apache AND GPL.
I do not know what is harder. Probably the latter.
Is there any risk analysis being done on the current status?
IMO the current FDio distribution is violating the Apache license as interpreted by the Apache foundation but not the
Free software foundation.
This is an excellent question and is something we missed - good catch and thanks.
Essentially do we have the right to relicense the affected code?
You are correct that has been problematic for other projects.
OpenSSL and VLC are notably examples of this at the extreme end.
Based on Charter Section 7 (https://old.fd.io/charter/)
1. Participants acknowledge that the copyright in all new contributions will be retained by the copyright holder as independent works of authorship and that no contributor or copyright holder will be required to assign copyrights to the Project.
2. Except as described in Section 7.c., all code contributions to the Project are subject to the following:
i. All new inbound code contributions to the Project must be made using the Apache License, Version 2.0 (available here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0) (the “Project License”).
So anyone contributing code to FD.io still retains the copyright.
And contributed code on the basis of the FD.io Apache 2 License.
We will need a followup discussion on this at today's TSC.
(can you join?)
From: Luca Muscariello <muscariello@...>
Sent: Thursday 5 March 2020 13:01
To: Kinsella, Ray <ray.kinsella@...>
Cc: tsc@...; Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkonstan@...>; Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECH SRO at Cisco) <vrpolak@...>; Trishan de Lanerolle <tdelanerolle@...>
Subject: Re: [tsc] Voting on the Scapy licensing resolutions
Can I ask a clarification question?
Only the copyright holder can modify a distribution license whereas it looks like the TSC is going to act
as a copyright holder's proxy. Is this correct?
On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 1:51 PM Ray Kinsella <mailto:ray.kinsella@...> wrote:
So we need to take a vote on the proposed Scapy licensing resolutions at today TSC.
That is we …
1. We approve of the mitigations listed in last Thursday’s presentation.
A. Explicit licensing of affected code as GPLv2 (CSIT, VPP & TRex)
B. Moving affected code to a GPL labelled directory (CSIT).
C. Preservation of project apache licensing through process separation (CSIT, VPP & TRex).
2. We approve these exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 Licensing for CSIT, VPP & TRex.
Proposed vote text:
Based on the mitigation described. The FD.io TSC approves exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 licensing permitting the use of Scapy by CSIT, VPP & TRex.
Any comments on the above are welcome.
FD.io Project TSC Member
Join firstname.lastname@example.org to automatically receive all group messages.